Structure and Change: Douglass North's Economics

Douglass North is a pivotal figure in the development of the 'new' economic history as well as the 'new' institutional economics. However, the relationship between these two aspects of his thinking remains undeveloped in previous critical assessments of North's work. The relationship is clarified here. The evidence presented indicates that three distinct phases can be distinguished in his writings between the 1950s and the 2000s. The paper relates these changing views to the shifting mainstream within economics and the effects that this shift has in turn had on economic history research. Economic history has adapted to economic research by abandoning some practices associated with the earlier cliometric literature. Furthermore, North is unique to the extent that his recent writings represent something of a convergence with 'old' institutionalism. © 2010 Taylor & Francis.

How many bad apples are in a bunch? An experimental investigation of perceived pesticide residue risks

Subjective risks of having contaminated apples elicited via the Exchangeability Method (EM) are examined in this study. In particular, as the experimental design allows us to investigate the validity of elicited risk measures, we examine the magnitude of differences between valid and invalid observations. In addition, using an econometric model, we also explore the effect of consumers’ socioeconomic status and attitudes toward food safety on subjects’ perceptions of pesticide residues in apples. Results suggest first, that consumers do not expect an increase in the number of apples containing only one pesticide residue, but, rather, in the number of those apples with traces of multiple residues. Second, we find that valid subjective risk measures do not significantly diverge from invalid ones, indicative of little effect of internal validity on the actual magnitude of subjective risks. Finally, we show that subjective risks depend on age, education, a subject’s ties to the apple industry, and consumer association membership.

Eliciting and estimating valid subjective probabilities: An experimental investigation of the Exchangeability Method.

Using a laboratory experiment, we investigate whether incentive compatibility affects subjective probabilities elicited via the exchangeability method (EM), an elicitation technique consisting of several chained questions. We hypothesize that subjects who are aware of the chaining strategically behave and provide invalid subjective probabilities, while subjects who are not aware of the chaining state their real beliefs and provide valid subjective probabilities. The validity of subjective probabilities is investigated using de Finetti's notion of coherence, under which probability estimates are valid if and only if they obey all axioms of probability theory.
Four experimental treatments are designed and implemented. Subjects are divided into two initial treatment groups: in the first, they are provided with real monetary incentives, and in the second, they are not. Each group is further sub-divided into two treatment groups, in the first, the chained structure of the experimental design is made clear to the subjects, while, in the second, the chained structure is hidden by randomizing the elicitation questions.
Our results suggest that subjects provided with monetary incentives and randomized questions provide valid subjective probabilities because they are not aware of the chaining which undermines the incentive compatibility of the exchangeability method.

Does climate change information affect stated risks of pine beetle impacts on forests? An application of the exchangeability method

Risks are an essential feature of future climate change impacts. We explore whether knowledge that climate change might be the source of increasing pine beetle impacts on public or private forests affects stated risk estimates of damage, elicited using the exchangeability method. We find that across subjects the difference between public and private forest status does not influence stated risks, but the group told that global warming is the cause of pine beetle damage has significantly higher risk perceptions than the group not given this information.

Employing neo-Durkheimian institutional theory in crosscultural accounting research

Purpose
Neo-Durkheimian institutional theory, as developed by the anthropologist Mary Douglas, is proposed as a suitable theory base for undertaking cross-cultural accounting research. Her social theory provides a structure for examining within-country and cross-country actions and behaviours of different groups and communities. It avoids associating nations and cultures, instead contending any nation will comprise four different solidarities engaging in constant
dialogues. Further, it is a dynamic theory able to take account of cultural change.

Design/methodology/approach
The paper establishes a case for using neo-Durkheimian institutional theory in cross-cultural accounting research by specifying the key components of the theory and addressing common criticisms. To illustrate how the theory might be utilised in the domain of accounting and finance research, a comparative interpretation of the different experiences of financialization in Germany and the UK is provided drawing on Douglas’s grid-group schema.

Findings (mandatory)
Neo-Durkheimian institutional theory is deemed sufficiently capable of interpreting the
behaviours of different social groups and is not open to the same criticisms as Hofstede’s
work. Differences in Douglasian cultural dialogues in the post-1945 history of Germany and
the UK provide an explanation of the variations in the comparative experiences of
financialization.