马克思与诺斯制度变迁理论比较研究

发布时间：2018-04-25 19:53

本文选题：马克思 + 诺斯　；参考：《东南大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：新制度经济学一改西方经济学的传统,将制度引入经济分析中,认为制度内生于经济发展过程。其实早于新制度经济学100年的时候,马克思就把制度分析和经济分析联系起来,型构了其伟大的社会发展理论---历史唯物主义,阐明了人类社会发展规律,指明了未来社会的发展趋势。道格拉斯·C·诺斯无疑是新制度经济学的杰出代表,他因“用经济理论和数量方法来解释经济和制度变迁从而在经济史方面的新的研究”与福格尔共同获得了1993年诺贝尔经济学奖,也曾自认为是“马克思理论的笃信者”,后来又自认为超越了马克思。本文对两种制度变迁理论进行了比较分析,认为两者的制度范畴、历史背景、假设前提和方法论、制度的本质和起源、制度的功能、制度变迁的动力和路径、所有制(产权)理论都不相同,诺斯并未超越马克思。马克思从整体主义的方法论出发,更多关注社会基本经济制度的变迁。本文“重返”马克思,对其未来社会公有制理论作了梳理,认为其完全胜任中国特色社会主义建设的指导思想,增强了改革过程的制度自信和理论自信。诺斯的制度理论有为资本和私有制辩护的痕迹,与马克思理论有本质区别,但这不妨碍其在“市场交易已成为最普遍的经济关系形式”(林岗,2000)条件下,对制度的边际调整和变化的成功研究。我国改革进程也是制度变迁,而且是生产关系的基本点---所有制不发生根本变化的条件下制度的边际调整和变化,诺斯的制度变迁理论亦有用武之地。特别在应对传统文化阻碍“开放进入的社会秩序”形成、既得利益群体阻挠改革进程方面,诺斯的“路径依赖”理论、渐进式制度变迁理论提供了良好的借鉴。通过本文的研究,作者认为：一、马克思主义社会发展理论在当代仍具有强大的生命力,从对资本主义的批判角度,对整个人类社会未来发展的预测角度比诺斯维护私有产权和资本主义制度的理论更为宏观、更为全面、更为科学；历史唯物主义为中国特色社会主义建设提供了理论指导,马克思未来社会所有制理论为我国社会主义所有制改革提供了理论依据。二、中国历史悠久,传统文化影响源远流长,区域范围广、地区差异大,要建立中国特色社会主义,必须突破传统“有限进入的社会秩序”之路径依赖,兼顾各阶层、各地区利益,发展非人际关系化交换所需的社会条件,这些制度的边际调整和变化,诺斯的研究颇具现实意义。三、社会主义市场经济的目标模式是让市场在资源配置中发挥决定性作用；而基于劳动产权的股份制将是社会主义公有制的实现方式,也是向未来社会过渡的公有制模式
[Abstract]:The new institutional economics changed the tradition of western economics and introduced the institution into the economic analysis and thought that the institution was born in the process of economic development. In fact, as early as 100 years before the new institutional economics, Marx linked institutional analysis with economic analysis, constructed his great social development theory--historical materialism, and clarified the law of human social development. It points out the development trend of the future society. Douglas C. North is no doubt an outstanding representative of the new institutional economics. He won the 1993 Nobel Prize in economics with Vogel for "explaining economic and institutional changes in terms of economic theory and quantity, and thus new research in economic history." he also considered himself "a believer in Marx's theory." Later he thought he had surpassed Marx. This paper makes a comparative analysis of the two theories of institutional change, and concludes that their institutional category, historical background, hypothetical premise and methodology, the essence and origin of institution, the function of institution, the motive force and path of institutional change, and so on. Ownership (property rights) theory is different, North did not surpass Marx. Starting from the methodology of holism, Marx paid more attention to the changes of social basic economic system. This article "returns" Marx, has made the comb to its future social public ownership theory, thinks that it is completely competent for the guiding ideology of the construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics, has strengthened the system confidence and the theory confidence in the reform process. North's institutional theory has traces of defending capital and private ownership, which is essentially different from Marx's theory, but this does not prevent it from becoming the most common form of economic relations under the condition that "market transactions have become the most common form of economic relations" (Lin Gang 2000). A successful study of the marginal adjustment and change of institutions. The reform process of our country is also institutional change, and it is the basic point of production--The marginal adjustment and change of system under the condition that ownership does not change fundamentally. North's theory of institutional change also has the opportunity of exerting his ability. Especially in dealing with the traditional culture hindering the formation of "open into the social order" and the vested interest groups obstructing the reform process, North's "path dependence" theory and the gradual institutional change theory provide a good reference. Through the research of this paper, the author thinks: first, Marxist social development theory still has strong vitality in the contemporary era, from the angle of criticizing capitalism, The prediction of the future development of human society as a whole is more macroscopic, comprehensive and scientific than North's theory of safeguarding private property rights and the capitalist system. Historical materialism provides theoretical guidance for the construction of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Marx's theory of future social ownership provides a theoretical basis for socialist ownership reform in China. Second, China has a long history, has a long history of traditional culture, has a wide range of regions and wide regional differences. In order to establish socialism with Chinese characteristics, it is necessary to break through the path dependence of the traditional "limited access social order" and take into account all classes. The interests of various regions, the social conditions needed for the development of non-interpersonal exchange, and the marginal adjustment and change of these systems are of great practical significance to North's study. Third, the target mode of socialist market economy is to let the market play a decisive role in the allocation of resources, and the joint-stock system based on labor property rights will be the way to realize socialist public ownership and the mode of public ownership in the transition to the future society.
【学位授予单位】：东南大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：A81

【参考文献】