Mises Search

Volume 1, No. 3 (Fall 1998) Neoclassical Microeconomic Theory: The Founding Austrian Version. By A.M. Endres. London: Routledge, 1997 A.M. Endres states, on the opening page of his book, his intent is to “investigate the ways in which the [founding] Austrians were developing an essentially unified project which was different from other founding

  Volume 2, No. 4 (Winter 1999)   I n this article, we will attempt to demonstrate that the Austrian method of dealing with both theory and history is informed by its perspective on uncertainty as the core concept uniting the various characterizations of Austrian thought.  Furthermore, we will argue that the Austrian School, among modern schools

  Volume 3, No. 3 (Fall 2000)   It is a rare individual who is able to draw from many disparate traditions in economic thought and combine these into a coherent research program.  Brian J.  Loasby , longtime professor of economics at the University of  Stirling , United Kingdom, is one such individual.  This first of two volumes of essays written

  Volume 7, No. 3 (Fall 2004)   Comparative analysis, however, could reveal some broader principles by which reform proposals may be evaluated. This exercise might prove to be more valuable than arguments over which theoretical perspective is the correct one. We attempt just such an exercise in this paper. Beginning from a broad definition of

Abstract : The concept of entrepreneurial opportunity has undergone a period of useful critique and refinement since Venkataraman (1997) and Shane and Venkataraman (2000) employed the term as one of the defining features of entre­preneurship studies. This paper presents a novel Austrian reinterpretation of this concept as an intersubjective