R. H. Coase - The Firm, the Market, and the Law.pdf

R. H. Coase - The Firm, the Market, and the Law.pdf

《R. H. Coase - The Firm, the Market, and the Law.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《R. H. Coase - The Firm, the Market, and the Law.pdf（238页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

THEFIRMR.H.CoaseTheFirmtheMarketandtheLawTheFirmtheMarketandtheLawR.H.Coasew）TheUniversityofChicagoPressChicagoandLondonThelfniversit）olChicagoPress.Chicago60637IIk-IniversitjofChicagoPress,Ltd.,London1988byTheUniversit）ofChicagoAllrightsreserved.Published1988Paperbackedition1990PrimedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica1312II10090807060504910II1213LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationDataCoase,R.H.（RonaldHarry）Thefirm,themarket,andthelaw/R.H.Coase.Includesindex.ISBN0-226-11101-6（paper）I.Industrialorganization（Economictheory）2.Externalities（Economics）3.Capitalism.I.Title.HD2326.C61988338.5142dcl987-24193ThepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsoftheAmericanNationalStandardforInformationSciencesPermanenceofPaperforPrintedLibraryMaterials.ANSIZ39.48-1992.ContentsPrefaceviiONETheFirm,theMarket,andtheLaw1TWOTheNatureoftheFirm33THREEIndustrialOrganization:

AProposalforResearch57FOURTheMarginalCostControversy75FIVETheProblemofSocialCost95SIXNotesontheProblemofSocialCost157SEVENTheLighthouseinEconomics187Index215DigitizedbytheInternetArchivein2011http:

/www.archive.org/details/firmmarketlawOOcoasPrefaceThepurposeofthisbookistopersuademyfelloweconomiststochangethewaytheyanalyzeanumberofimportantques-tionsinmicro-economics.Mostofthebookconsistsofreprintsofpreviouslypublishedarticles,butIhaveattemptedinanintroductoryessayandinapaperentitledNotesontheProb-lemofSocialCosttomakeclearerthecharacterofthear-gumentinthesearticlesandtorespondtosomeofthemaincriticismswhichhavebeenmadeofthem.Nochangeshavebeenmadeinthearticlesreprintedexcepttocorrectmisprintsandtoremovesomeeccentricitiesinmyspellingandgrammar.IhavetothankGaryBecker,GerhardCasper,AaronDirector,andGeorgeStigler,allofwhomreadmyintroductoryessayandNotesontheProblemofSocialCostandmadesuggestionswhichhaveresultedinmanyimprovements,al-thoughnotasmanyastheywouldhavewished.ONETheFirm,theMarket,andtheLawI.TheAimoftheBookThecoreofthisbookconsistsofthreepapers,TheNatureoftheFirm（1937）,TheMarginalCostControversy（1946）,andTheProblemofSocialCost（1960）.Otherpaperswhichextend,illustrate,orexplaintheargumentsinthesethreepa-persarealsoincluded.Aswillbecomeapparent,theseessaysallembodyessentiallythesamepointofview.Mypointofviewhasnotingeneralcommandedassent,norhasmyargument,forthemostpart,beenunderstood.Nodoubtinadequaciesinmyexpositionhavebeenpartlyrespon-sibleforthisandIamhopefulthatthisintroductoryessay,whichdealswithsomeofthemainpointsraisedbycommen-tatorsandrestatesmyargument,willhelptomakemypositionmoreunderstandable.ButIdonotbelievethatafailureofexpositionisthemainreasonwhyeconomistshavefoundmyargumentsodifficulttoassimilate.Astheargumentinthesepapersis,Ibelieve,simple,sosimpleindeedasalmosttomaketheirpropositionsfallintothecategoryoftruthswhichcanbedeemedself-evident,theirrejectionorapparentincomprehen-sibilitywouldseemtoimplythatmosteconomistshaveadif-ferentwayoflookingateconomicproblemsanddonotsharemyconceptionofthenatureofoursubject.ThisIbelievetobetrue.AtthepresenttimethedominantviewofthenatureofeconomicsisthatexpressedinRobbinsdefinition:

Econom-icsisthesciencewhichstudieshumanbehaviourasarela-tionshipbetweenendsandscarcemeanswhichhavealternativeTheFirm,theMarket,andtheLawuses.1Thismakeseconomicsthescienceofhumanchoice.Inpractice,mosteconomists,includingRobbins.restricttheirworktoamuchnarrowersetofchoicesthanthisdefinitionwouldsuggest.Recently,however,BeckerhasarguedthatRobbinswayoflookingateconomicsneednotbesocon-strainedandthattheeconomicapproach,ashetermsit,canandshouldbeappliedmoregenerallythroughoutthesocialsciences.Thattheeconomicapproachcanbeappliedsuc-cessfullyintheothersocialsciencesisdemonstratedbyBeck-ersownwork.2Itsverysuccess,however,posesthequestion.Whyhavetheeconomiststoolsoftradeprovedtobesoversatile?

Myparticularinteresthasbeeninthatpartofeconomictheorywhichdealswithfirms,industries,andmarkets,whichusedtobecalledValueandDistributionandisnowusuallytermedpricetheoryormicro-economics.Itisanintricatestruc-tureofhighintellectualqualityandhasproducedvaluablein-sights.Economistsstudyhowthechoiceofconsumers,inde-cidingwhichgoodsandservicestopurchase,isdeterminedbytheirincomesandthepricesatwhichgoodsandservicescanbebought.Theyalsostudyhowproducersdecidewhatfactorsofproductiontouseandwhatproductsandservicestomakeandsellandinwhatquantities,giventhepricesofthefactors,thedemandforthefinalproduct,andtherelationbetweenoutputandtheamountsoffactorsemployed.Theanalysisisheldtogetherbytheassumptionthatconsumersmaximizeutil-ity（anonexistententitywhichplaysapartsimilar.Isuspect,tothatofetherintheoldphysics）andbytheassumptionthatproducershaveastheiraimtomaximizeprofitornetincome（forwhichthereisagooddealmoreevidence）.Thedecisionsofconsumersandproducersarebroughtintoharmonybythetheoryofexchange.Theelaborationoftheanalysisshouldnothidefromusitsessentialcharacter:

itisananalysisofchoice.Itisthiswhichgivesthetheoryitsversatility.Beckerpointsoutthatwhat1.LionelRobbins.AnEssayontheNatureandSignificanceofEconomicScience,2nded.（London:

Macmillun&Co.,1935）,16.2.SeethevariousstudiesinGaryS.Becker,TheEconomicApproachtoHumanBehaviorChicago:

Universit）ofChicagoPress.1976）TheFirm,theMarket,andtheLawmostdistinguisheseconomicsasadisciplinefromotherdis-ciplinesinthesocialsciencesisnotitssubjectmatterbutitsapproach.3Ifthetheorieswhichhavebeendevelopedineco-nomics（oratanyrateinmicro-economics）constituteforthemostpartawayofanalyzingthedeterminantsofchoice（andIthinkthisistrue）,itiseasytoseethattheyshouldbeap-plicabletootherhumanchoicessuchasthosethataremadeinlaworpolitics.Inthissenseeconomistshavenosubjectmatter.Whathasbeendevelopedisanapproachdivorced（orwhichcanbedivorced）fromsubjectmatter.Indeed,sincemanisnottheonlyanimalthatchooses,itistobeexpectedthatthesameapproachcanbeappliedtotherat,cat,andoctopus,allofwhomarenodoubtengagedinmaximizingtheirutilitiesinmuchthesamewayasdoesman.Itisthereforenoaccidentthatpricetheoryhasbeenshowntobeapplicabletoanimalbehaviour.4Thispreoccupationofeconomistswiththelogicofchoice,whileitmayultimatelyrejuvenatethestudyoflaw,politicalscience,andsociology,hasnonethelesshad,inmyview,se-riousadverseeffectsoneconomicsitself.Oneresultofthisdivorceofthetheoryfromitssubjectmatterhasbeenthattheentitieswhosedecisionseconomistsareengagedinanalyzinghavenotbeenmadethesubjectofstudyandinconsequencelackanysubstance.Theconsumerisnotahumanbeingbutaconsistentsetofpreferences.Thefirmtoaneconomist,asSlaterhassaid,kkiseffectivelydefinedasacostcurveandademandcurve,andthetheoryissimplythelogicofoptimalpricingandinputcombination.5Exchangetakesplacewithoutanyspecificationofitsinstitutionalsetting.Wehaveconsumerswithouthumanity,firmswithoutorganization,andevenex-changewithoutmarkets.TherationalutilitymaximizerofeconomictheorybearsnoresemblancetothemanontheClaphambusor,indeed,to3.Ibid.,5.4.See,forexample,JohnH.Kagel.RaymondC.Battalio.HowardRachlin.andLeonardGreen,DemandCurvesforAnimalConsumers/1Quar-terlyJournalofEconomics96,no.1（Februaryis,xi）:

1-14.5MartinSlater,ForewordtoEdithT.Penrose./;TheoryojtheGrowthojtheFirm,2nded.（WhitePlains,N.Y.:

M.E.Sharpe,1980）.ix.TheFirm,theMarket,andtheLawanyman（orwoman）onanybus.Thereisnoreasontosupposethatmosthumanbeingsareengagedinmaximizinganythingunlessitbeunhappiness,andeventhiswithincompletesuc-cess.Knighthasexpressedthethoughtverywell:

il.theargumentofeconomists.thatmenworkandthinktogetthemselvesoutoftroubleisatleasthalfaninversionofthefacts.Thethingsweworkforareannoyersasoftenassatis-fies/wespendasmuchingenuityingettingintotroubleasingettingout,andinanycaseenoughtokeepineffectively.Amanwhohasnothingtoworryaboutimmediatelybusieshimselfincreatingsomething,getsintosomeabsorbinggame,fallsinlove,preparestoconquersomeenemy,orhuntlionsortheNorthPoleorwhatnot.6Ibelievethathumanpreferencescametobewhattheyareinthosemillionsofyearsinwhichourancestors（whetherornottheycanbeclassifiedashuman）livedinhuntingbandsandwerethosepreferenceswhich,insuchconditions,werecon-ducivetosurvival.Itmaybe,therefore,thatultimatelytheworkofsociobiologists（andtheircritics）willenableustoconstructapictureofhumannatureinsuchdetailthatwecanderivethesetofpreferenceswithwhicheconomistsstart.Andifthisresultisachieved,itwillenableustorefineouranalysisofconsumerdemandandofotherkindsofbehaviourintheeconomicsphere.Inthemeantime,however,whatevermakesmenchooseastheydo,wemustbecontentwiththeknowledgethatforgroupsofhumanbeings,inalmostallcircumstances,ahigher（relative）priceforanythingwillleadtoareductionintheamountdemanded.Thisdoesnotonlyrefertoamoneypricebuttopriceinitswidestsense.Whethermenarerationalornotindecidingtowalkacrossadangerousthoroughfaretoreachacertainrestaurant,wecanbesurethatfewerwilldosothemoredangerousitbecomes.Andweneednotdoubtthattheavailabilityofalessdangerousalternative,say,ape-destrianbridge,willnormallyreducethenumberofthosecrossingthethoroughfare,northat,aswhatisgainedbycross-ingbecomesmoreattractive,thenumberofpeoplecrossing6.FrankH.Knight,TheEthicsofCompetition,2nded.（NewYork:

Harper&Bros.1936）.32.TheFirm,theMarket,andtheLawwillincrease.Thegeneralizationofsuchknowledgeconstitutespricetheory.Itdoesnotseemtometorequireustoassumethatmenarerationalutilitymaximizers.Ontheotherhand,itdoesnottelluswhypeoplechooseastheydo.Whyamanwilltakeariskofbeingkilledinordertoobtainasandwichishiddenfromuseventhoughweknowthat,iftheriskisin-creasedsufficiently,hewillforegoseekingthatpleasure.Noneoftheessaysinthisbookdealswiththecharacterofhumanpreferences,nor,asIhavesaid,doIbelievethateconomistswillbeabletomakemuchheadwayuntilagreatdealmoreworkhasbeendonebysociobiologistsandothernoneconomists.Buttheacceptancebyeconomistsofaviewofhumannaturesolackingincontentisofapiecewiththeirtreatmentofinstitutionswhicharecentraltotheirwork.Theseinstitutionsarethefirmandthemarketwhichtogethermakeuptheinstitutionalstructureoftheeconomicsystem.Inmain-streameconomictheory,thefirmandthemarketare,forthemostpart,assumedtoexistandarenotthemselvesthesubjectofinvestigation.Oneresulthasbeenthatthecrucialroleofthelawindeterminingtheactivitiescarriedoutbythefirmandinthemarkethasbeenlargelyignored.Whatdifferentiatestheess