Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Social innovation and Austrian economics: Exploring the gains from intellectual trade

  • Published:
The Review of Austrian Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Austrian school of economics has played a key contribution toward an improved understanding of the characteristics of economic innovation. Over recent decades the language and concepts of innovation theory has broadened to non-market settings, among other things giving rise to a voluminous literature on “social innovation.” During the same period of time, scholars have increasingly utilised Austrian economic insights to explore the nature of social interaction and the dynamics of social change, delving into matters such as social entrepreneurship, non-price coordination, and social learning. Both social innovation and non-economic Austrian scholarship have largely been conducted independently of each other. The central claim of this paper is that scope exists for meaningful intellectual exchanges between these two sub-branches of social scientific endeavour. An Austrian perspective on social innovation centres upon entrepreneurs using their unique knowledge to create and change social norms and practices, providing micro-level foundations for broader scale social innovations of cultural and institutional character. Social innovation theory assails the limitations of market-state duality by stressing the involvement of non-market, non-state social actors in promulgating social novelties. Austrian perspectives on social theory may also gain from the social-innovation emphasis upon enhancing broad aspects of human well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aligica, P. D., Boettke, P. J., & Tarko, V. (2019). Public governance and the classical-Liberal perspective: Political economy foundations. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Almudi, I., Fatas-Villafranca, F., Izquierdo, L. R., & Potts, J. (2017). The economics of utopia: A co-evolutionary model of ideas, citizenship and socio-political change. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 27(4), 629–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. R., & Smith, R. (2007). The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of being enterprising. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19(6), 479–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayob, N., Teasdale, S., & Fagan, K. (2016). How social innovation ‘came to be’: Tracing the evolution of a contested concept. Journal of Social Policy, 45(4), 635–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, E. E., & McWhorter, R. R. (2019). Social movement learning and social innovation: Empathy, agency, and the design of solutions to unmet social needs. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 21(2), 224–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J. (1998). Rational choice and human agency in economics and sociology: Exploring the weber-Austrian connection. In H. Giersch (Ed.), Merits and limits of markets (pp. 54–81). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Coyne, C. J. (2008). The political economy of the philanthropic enterprise. In G. E. Shockley, P. M. Frank, & R. R. Stough (Eds.), Non-market entrepreneurship: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 71–88). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Coyne, C. J. (2009). Context matters: Institutions and entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 135–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Prychitko, D. L. (2004). Is an independent nonprofit sector prone to failure? Toward an Austrian school interpretation of nonprofit and voluntary action. Conversations on Philanthropy, 1, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Storr, V. H. (2002). Post-classical political economy: Polity, society and economy in Weber, Mises and Hayek. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 61(1), 161–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P. J., & Subrick, J. R. (2003). Rule of law, development, and human capabilities. Supreme Court Economic Review, 10, 109–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M. (1982). Order defined in the process of its emergence. Literature of Liberty, 5(4), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. M., & Congleton, R. D. ([1998] 2003). Politics by Principle, Not Interest: Toward Nondiscriminatory Democracy. Collected works of James M. Buchanan, volume 11. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.

  • Capriati, M. (2013). Capabilities, freedoms and innovation: Exploring connection. Innovation and Development, 3(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caulier-Grice, J., Davies, A., Patrick, R., & Norman, W. (2012). Defining social innovation. The Young Foundation. https://youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/TEPSIE.D1.1.Report.DefiningSocialInnovation.Part-1-defining-social-innovation.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2018.

  • Chamlee-Wright, E. (1997). The cultural foundations of economic development: Urban female entrepreneurship in Ghana. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamlee-Wright, E., & Myers, J. (2008). Discovery and social learning in non-priced environments: An Austrian view of social network theory. Review of Austrian Economics, 21(2–3), 151–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamlee-Wright, E., & Storr, V. H. (2015). Social economy as an extension of the Austrian research program. In P. J. Boettke & C. J. Coyne (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Austrian economics (pp. 247–271). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clay, A. (2017). Utopia Inc. Aeon, February 28. https://aeon.co/essays/like-start-ups-most-intentional-communities-fail-why. Accessed 15 Aug 2019.

  • Coyne, C. J. (2013). Doing bad by doing good: Why humanitarian action fails. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. B. (2008). Heterodox economics, the fragmentation of the mainstream, and embedded individual analysis. In J. T. Harvey & R. F. Garnett Jr. (Eds.), Future directions for heterodox economics (pp. 53–72). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, E., & Kuchař, P. (2017). Emergent Orders of Worth: Must we agree on more than a price? Cosmos + Taxis, 4(1), 4–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (2015). The Oxford handbook of social movements. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Domanski, D., & Kaletka, C. (2018). Social innovation ecosystems. In J. Howaldt, C. Kaletka, A. Schröder, & M. Zirngiebl (Eds.), Atlas of social innovation – New practices for a better future (pp. 208–211). Dortmund: TU Dortmund University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dopfer, K., & Potts, J. (2008). The general theory of economic evolution. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, P. M., & Shockley, G. E. (2016). A critical assessment of social entrepreneurship: Ostromian Polycentricity and Hayekian knowledge. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45(4), 61S–77S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franz, H.-W., Hochgerner, J., & Howaldt, J. (2012). Challenge social innovation: An introduction. In H.-W. Franz, J. Hochgerner, & J. Howaldt (Eds.), Challenge social innovation: Potentials for business, social entrepreneurship, welfare and civil society (pp. 1–16). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Garnett Jr., R. F. (2011). Hayek and philanthropy: A classical liberal road not taken. In A. Farrant (Ed.), Hayek, mill, and the Liberal tradition (pp. 148–162). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, S. (2010). The power of social innovation: How civic entrepreneurs ignite community networks for good. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, N. (2019). Don Lavoie’s dialectical liberalism. In R. E. Bissell, C. M. Sciabarra, & E. W. Younkins (Eds.), The dialectics of liberty: Exploring the context of human freedom (pp. 133–148). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grube, L. E., & Storr, V. H. (2015). Culture and economic action. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grube, L. E., Haeffele-Balch, S., & Davies, E. G. (2017). The organizational evolution of the American National Red Cross: An Austrian and Bloomington approach to organizational growth and expansion. Advances in Austrian Economics, 22, 89–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeffele, S., & Storr, V. H. (2019a). Hierarchical management structures and housing the poor: An analysis of habitat for humanity in Birmingham, Alabama. The Journal of Private Enterprise, 34(1), 15–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haeffele, S., & Storr, V. H. (2019b). Understanding nonprofit social enterprises: Lessons from Austrian economics. The Review of Austrian Economics, 32(3), 229–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrisson, D., Chaari, N., & Comeau-Valée, M. (2012). Intersectoral Alliance and social innovation: When corporations meet civil society. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 83(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., & Potts, J. (2014). Cultural science: A natural history of stories, demes, knowledge and innovation. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. ([1945] 1948). Individualism: True and false. In Individualism and economic order (pp. 1–32). London: Routledge.

  • Hayek, F. A. (1960). The constitution of liberty. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. (1964). Kinds of order in society. New Individualist Review, 3(2), 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. ([1939] 1997). Freedom and the economic system. In Caldwell, B. (Ed.), Socialism and war: Essays, documents, reviews (pp. 189-211). Collected works of F. A. Hayek, volume 10. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Howaldt, J., & Schwarz, M. (2010). Social innovation: Concepts, research fields and international trends. In K. Henning & F. Hees (Eds.), Studies for innovation in a modern working environment – International monitoring (Vol. Volume 5). IMZ/ZLW & IfU: Aachen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howaldt, J., Kaletka, C., Schröder, A., & Zirngiebl, M. (2018). Atlas of social innovation – new practices for a better future. Dortmund: TU Dortmund University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. (2015). Social innovation: Redesigning the welfare diamond. In A. Nicholls, J. Simon & M. Gabriel (Eds.), New frontiers in social innovation research (pp. 89–106). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Koppl, R. (2006). Entrepreneurial behavior as a human universal. In M. Minniti (Ed.), Entrepreneurship – The engine of growth (pp. 1–20). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langrill, R. N., & Storr, V. H. (2015). Contemporary Austrian economics and the new economic sociology. In P. J. Boettke & C. J. Coyne (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Austrian economics (pp. 547–562). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavoie, D. (1990). Economics and hermeneutics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavoie, D. (1993). Democracy, markets, and the legal order: Notes on the nature of politics in a radically Liberal society. Social Philosophy and Policy, 10(2), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. S. (2016). Interjurisdictional competition and the married women’s property acts. Public Choice, 166(3), 291–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, P. A. (2004). Structure and agency in economic analysis: The case of Austrian economics and the material embeddedness of socio-economic life. In J. B. Davis, A. Marciano, & J. H. Runde (Eds.), The Elgar companion to economics and philosophy (pp. 364–385). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liljenberg, A. (2005). A socio-dynamic understanding of markets: The progressive joining forces of economic sociology and Austrian economics. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 64(4), 999–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, D. S. (2017). Federal homelessness policy: A robust political economy approach. The Review of Austrian Economics, 30(3), 277–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A. (2010). Emergent politics and the power of ideas. Studies in Emergent Order, 3, 212–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A. (2018). The limits of liberalism: Good boundaries must be discovered. The Review of Austrian Economics, 31(2), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A., & Petersen, M. (2019). Poverty alleviation as an economic problem. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 43(1), 205–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey, M. (2018). Economic calculation and the limits of social entrepreneurship. In M. McCaffrey (Ed.), The economic theory of costs: Foundations and new directions (pp. 243–263). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migone, A. (2011). Embedded markets: A dialogue between F.A. Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The Review of Austrian Economics, 24(4), 355–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikl-Horke, G. (2008). Austrian economics and economic sociology: Past relations and future possibilities for a socio-economic perspective. Socio-Economic Review, 6(2), 201–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mises, L. v. ([1949] 2007). Human action: A treatise on economics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

  • Mises, L. v. ([1913] 2012). The general rise in prices in the light of economic theory. In R. M. Ebeling (Ed.), Selected writings of Ludwig von Mises: Monetary and economic policy problems before, during, and after the great war (pp. 131–195). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

  • Mulgan, G. (2006). The process of social innovation. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 1(2), 145–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, G. (2012a). Social innovation theories: Can theory catch up with practice? In H.-W. Franz, J. Hochgerner, & J. Howaldt (Eds.), Challenge social innovation: Potentials for business, social entrepreneurship, welfare and civil society (pp. 19–42). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, G. (2012b). The theoretical foundations of social innovation. In A. Nicholls & A. Murdock (Eds.), Social innovation: Blurring boundaries to reconfigure markets (pp. 33–65). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Novak, M. (2018). Civil society as a complex adaptive phenomenon. Cosmos + Taxis, 5(3/4), 3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, D., & Dooley, L. (2009). Applying innovation. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palagashvili, L., Piano, E., & Skarbek, D. (2017). The decline and rise of institutions: A modern survey of the Austrian contribution to the economic analysis of institutions. London: Cambridge University Press Elements.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts, J. (2010). Innovation by elimination: A proposal for negative policy experiments in the public sector. Innovation: Organization & Management, 12(2), 238–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, J. (2014). Innovation is a spontaneous order. Cosmos + Taxis, 2(1), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinstaller, A. (2013). An evolutionary view of social innovation and the process of dynamic change. WWWforEurope working paper series no. 43. http://www.foreurope.eu/fileadmin/documents/pdf/Workingpapers/WWWforEurope_WPS_no043_MS51.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2018.

  • Robeyns, I. (2016). The capability approach. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/capability-approach. Accessed 30 Oct 2018.

  • Rosen, S. (1997). Austrian and neoclassical economics: Any gains from trade? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(4), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shey, T. H. (1977). Why communes fail: A comparative analysis of the viability of Danish and American communes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 39(3), 605–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D. A. (2003). Social movements. In L. T. Reynolds & N. J. Herman-Kinney (Eds.), Handbook of symbolic interactionism (pp. 811–833). Walnut Creek: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storr, V. H. (2013). Understanding the culture of markets. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Storr, V. H., Haeffele-Balch, S., & Grube, L. E. (2015). Community revival in the wake of disaster: Lessons in local entrepreneurship. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Storr, V. H., Haeffele-Balch, S., & Grube, L. E. (2017). Social capital and social learning after hurricane Sandy. Review of Austrian Economics, 30(4), 447–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. (1996). Social norms and social roles. Columbia Law Review, 96(4), 903–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutter, D., & Smith, D. J. (2017). Coordination in disaster: Nonprice learning and the allocation of resources after natural disasters. Review of Austrian Economics, 30(4), 469–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C., & Tarrow, S. (2006). Contentious politics. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, K. (1994). Can democratic society reform itself? The limits of constructive change. In P. J. Boettke & D. L. Prychitko (Eds.), The market process: Essays in contemporary Austrian economics (pp. 229–243). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

  • Wagner, R. E. (2016). Politics as a peculiar business: Insights from a theory of entangled political economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wandel, J., & Valentinov, V. (2014). The nonprofit Catallaxy: An Austrian economics perspective on the nonprofit sector. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 25(1), 138–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T. F.-L. (2011). New perspectives on economic development: A human agency approach. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, R. (2010). Innovations in doing and being: Capability innovations at the intersection of Schumpeterian political economy and human development. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(2), 255–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Paul Lewis and an anonymous referee for their comments on a draft version of this paper. The usual caveats apply.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Sociology, College of Arts and Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Mikayla Novak

Authors
  1. Mikayla Novak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Sole authored paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mikayla Novak.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest/Competing interests

None declared.

Availability of data and material

n/a

Code availability

n/a

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Novak, M. Social innovation and Austrian economics: Exploring the gains from intellectual trade. Rev Austrian Econ 34, 129–147 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-020-00503-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-020-00503-y

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation