Capital as in capitalism, or capital as in capital goods, or both?
- 47 Downloads
Austrian economists employ two different concepts of capital. Sometimes they treat capital as a universal phenomenon of human action as such. Capital is then understood as a combination of heterogeneous capital goods that appear on the intermediate stages of the production process. In other instances, they understand capital as a homogeneous value magnitude expressed in money terms that is employed in business accounting. This paper argues that this practice not only creates terminological confusion, but leads to substantial misunderstandings when it comes to important theories held by the Austrian school. The point is exemplified by the Austrian theory of the business cycle.
KeywordsCapital Capitalism Capital goods Austrian business cycle theory
JEL classificationB53 D24 P12
The author thanks Professor David Howden for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. He has further profited from discussions with several participants of the 2017 conference on “Perspectives of Integrated Austrian Theory” at the Universität Hamburg, Germany.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
- Böhm-Bawerk, E. v. (1889). The positive theory of capital. Translated by W. Smart. New York: G. E. Stechert & Co 1930Google Scholar
- Braun, E. (2015). Carl Menger's contribution to capital theory. History of Economic Ideas, 23(1), 77–99.Google Scholar
- Cachanosky, N., & Lewin, P. (2016). Financial foundations of austrian business cycle theory. In S. Horwitz (Ed.), Studies in Austrian macroeconomics (Advances in Austrian economics, volume 20) (pp. 15–44). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Garrison, R. W. (2001). Time and money: The macroeconomics of capital structure. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hayek, F. A. (1935). Prices and production (2nd ed.). Kelly, New York: Augustus M.Google Scholar
- Hayek, F. A. (1941). The pure theory of capital. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
- Kirzner, I. M. (1966). An essay on capital. In P. J. Boettke & F. Sautet (Eds.), The collected works of Israel M. Kirzner: Essays on capital and interest (pp. 14–133). Indianapolis: Liberty fund.Google Scholar
- Kirzner, I. M. (1976). Ludwig von Mises and the theory of capital and interest. In P. J. Boettke & F. Sautet (Eds.), The collected works of Israel M. Kirzner: Essays on capital and interest (pp. 134–146). Indianapolis: Liberty fund.Google Scholar
- Lachmann, L. M. (1978). Capital and its structure (2nd ed.). Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McNeel.Google Scholar
- Lewin, P. (2011). Capital in Disequilibrium (2nd ed.). Auburn: Mises Institute.Google Scholar
- Lewin, P., & Cachanosky, N. (2017). Value and capital: Austrian capital theory, retrospect and prospect. The Review of Austrian Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-016-0374-8.
- Macaulay, F. R. (1938). The movements of interest rates, bond yields and stock prices in the United States since 1856. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Menger, C. (1871). Principles of economics. Translated by J. Dingwall and B. F. Hoselitz. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute 2007Google Scholar
- Mises L. v. (1922). Socialism: An economic and sociological analysis. Transl. By J. Kahane. New Haven: Yale University Press 1951.Google Scholar
- Mises, L. v. (1949). Human action – A treatise on economics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Murphy, R. (2010). Lessons for the young economist. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
- Rothbard, M. N. (1962). Man, economy, and state: A treatise on economic principles. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute 2009.Google Scholar
- Strigl, R. v. (1934). Capital and production. Edited by Hülsmann, J. G., translated from the German by M. R. Hoppe and H.-H. Hoppe. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute 2000.Google Scholar