Some developments in blogosphere.
- The Business Law Prof Blog has re-opened for business, and it’s something of an Ohio enterprise. The four contributors are Stefan J. Padfield (Akron), Eric Chaffee (Dayton), Michael Borden (Cleveland-Marshall), and J. Scott Colesanti (Hofstra).
- The University of Pennsylvania Program on Regulation has launched a new regulatory blog called, appropriately enough, RegBlog. It’s overseen by Cary Coglianese, though it appears many of his law school (and university) colleagues will contribute as well.
- The Austrian Economists blog has a new name (and address): Coordination Problem. Pete Boettke explains the name change here. I think it’s a smart move, as the phrase “Austrian economics” is all too often associated with the idiosyncratic ideological views of a few vocal proponents, and not the school of economic thought that developed from the work of F.A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Carl Menger, and Eugen Böhm-Bawerk (among others), and was popularized by Henry Hazlitt.
mls says:
I dunno. “Coordination Problem” sounds like a site for those struggling in PE. Of course, most people probably assume “Austrian economics” refers to California’s budget problems, so these guys can’t win . . .
January 4, 2010, 4:13 pmMark N. says:
It’s an interesting shift in emphasis. Perhaps because of its association with libertarian politics, the term “Austrian school” often is interpreted as starting from ethical/moral first principles, natural-law style, and holding markets to be a good-in-themselves. That tends to make someone self-identifying as “Austrian school” come across as dogmatic or even circular, someone who promotes the benefits of markets because “markets are good” is his starting axiom. Not quite an accurate summary of the school of economic thought (although some of its exponents did seem to hold political views gravitating in a natural-law direction), but it’s a frequent interpretation.
The term “coordination problem” puts the spotlight squarely back on an investigation of how well various mechanisms for, well, coordinating people and activities work, without the mechanisms themselves being taken as dogmatic starting points.
January 4, 2010, 8:19 pmTGGP says:
Ironically enough, Mises himself was a utilitarian rather than a believer in deontological natural rights. The Ludwig von Mises Institute however was founded by Rothbard after Mises died and so is heavily influenced by Mises’ disciple.
I think the new title would better fit a game theorist’s blog.
January 5, 2010, 10:36 pm