Prices and knowledge: A market-process perspective
Prices and knowledge: A market-process perspective
Prices and knowledge: A market-process perspective
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Change, responsiveness <strong>and</strong> co-ordination 99is the appropriate thing this time’ (Nelson 1981: 101). The problem‘involves responding to unforeseen changes in dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> supplyconditions, <strong>and</strong> the challenge <strong>and</strong> opportunity of innovation’ (ibid.:99).Nelson believes that many of these issues were dealt with quiteexplicitly in the Mises-Lange-Hayek socialist calculation debate. Hisinterpretation of this debate helps to better underst<strong>and</strong> his position.Nelson <strong>and</strong> the calculation debateAccording to Nelson (1981:94), Mises’s proposal was ‘not that privateenterprise was optimal’ 6 but rather that <strong>market</strong> prices were ‘anessential aspect of any decently working information <strong>and</strong> computationsystem’ (Nelson <strong>and</strong> Winter 1982:360). Without them, producerswould have no economically relevant information to enable them todecide which goods to produce <strong>and</strong> what combinations of inputs touse; it would be ‘administratively infeasible’ for a central planner toachieve a ‘sensible allocation of resources’ (Nelson 1981:94). Withprices ‘the computation problem simplifies to calculations of profit orcost’ (Nelson <strong>and</strong> Winter 1982:360).In Nelson’s interpretation Lange’s reply involved a recognition ofthe role of prices. Lange produced a solution in which consumers<strong>and</strong> plant managers would make their decisions on the basis of pricesadjusted in response to excess dem<strong>and</strong>s <strong>and</strong> supplies by the centralauthority, ‘in effect, simulating a <strong>market</strong>’ (ibid.: 361). For Nelson,both Mises <strong>and</strong> Lange were arguing within a ‘static frame’. Hayek,on the other h<strong>and</strong>, was one of the ‘important exceptions to the static<strong>perspective</strong>’. He emphasized that ‘the conditions facing theeconomic system—resources, technologies, <strong>and</strong> preferences—tendto be variable’ <strong>and</strong> that these variations are ‘particular to place <strong>and</strong>time, <strong>and</strong> unpredictable’ (Nelson 1977:133–4). 7 Nelson’sinterpretation of Hayek’s argument is quite revealing of his boundedrationalityview of the economic problem <strong>and</strong> deserves therefore tobe quoted in full:Hayek’s objection to the Lange proposal involved an interestingblend of propositions about information computation <strong>and</strong> aboutcomm<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> control. He argued that Lange’s information-flowscheme could not h<strong>and</strong>le the enormous amount of detailed dataspecific to particular times <strong>and</strong> places. A rise in the dem<strong>and</strong> for