高校人文社会科学教育促进制度变迁的作用机制研究
|
摘要
人、制度与经济活动(行为)三者之间的相互关系一直为人们所普遍关注。制度变迁理论的核心就是研究制度与人的行为之间的互动作用。我国改革开放30年来,计划经济体制向市场经济体制的转型使得经济得到了迅速发展。我国学者更多地关注了制度的经济增长效应,而对于人与制度(变迁)关系的研究相对较少。
近年来,国家又在进行新一轮政治体制改革(如大部制改革等),再一次将制度变迁纳入政府的工作重点。在制度变迁过程中,人——弗里格斯特、姚洋所称的政治家中的关键行动者——扮演了最为重要的角色。拉坦等人的研究表明,人所具备的人文社会科学知识对制度变迁有着深远而基础性的影响。在现代条件下,教育无疑是传递文化、修习知识最主要的途径之一,人文社会科学教育是人文社会科学知识的主要供给源。从客观上讲,我国人文社会科学教育的发展并不令人满意。人文社会科学教育对制度变迁的影响的研究,相对于我国政治、经济体制改革的理论需要来讲显得有些滞后。基于现实和理论的双重需要,本文将人文社会科学教育作为制度行为人的制度能力供给源,将人文社会科学教育分工作为制度变迁的重要影响因素,揭示人文社会科学教育推动制度变迁的内在机制,以及高校人文社会科学教育对社会分工的影响,进一步拓展拉坦等人的理论假说,为高校人文社会科学教育的发展提供理论依据。
本文从制度供给和社会分工的角度出发,把高校人文社会科学教育作为制度供给源和社会分工的深化工具进行分析,以期构建高校人文社会科学教育对制度变迁作用的理论模型。
文章首先从制度变迁理论和分工理论两个方面回顾了国内外对于制度变迁、人文社会科学知识和分工的研究,认为制度行为人及其制度供给能力在制度变迁中发挥着重要作用,分工使得制度变迁不断深化。同时,以制度供给为主线,阐述了人文社会科学教育对制度供给,进而对制度变迁的作用机制,分析了分工对制度行为人知识结构和社会知识结构的影响,构建起高校人文社会科学教育对制度变迁作用的理论框架。
其次,以制度经济学为理论依据,认为影响制度供给过程成本的行为基础在于制度供给行为主体的创新偏好、思维方式及心智模式的理性程度,而理性程度又是决定制度变迁成本能否实现最小化的重要因素。制度行为人的供给动机、供给方式与供给能力是影响制度供给最主要的因素。高校人文社会科学教育借助于四种制度变迁效应——能力效应、信息效应、动力效应与资源配置效应,通过提高制度行为人的理性程度,促进制度变迁。
第三,将分工理论应用于教育分工的研究,分析了社会化分工与教育分工的相互关系,提出了高校人文社会科学知识及教育的发展促进社会变迁的路径与方式。教育分工促使社会组织结构进一步分化,提供了更多人文社会科学知识的携带者,使得社会分工中非技术性进步的人才增多,从而改善了制度供给的知识存量与结构,提高了制度变迁的有效性。
第四,采用回归分析方法,对1987—2004年我国高等院校人文社会科学教育和我国制度变迁的相关性进行定量分析。统计结果显示,高校人文社会科学教育专任教师数和毕业生数对宏观经济体制转型指数影响显著,支持了理论分析结果。
最后,根据实证分析结果,针对我国高等院校人文社会科学教育的发展实际情况,提出政策建议:加强人文社会科学的素质教育,提倡人文精神和科学精神的融合;保证必要的人文社会科学教育比重,建设中华民族的精神家园;继续推进高等教育教学改革,搞好人文社会科学学科建设;加强引导,营造全社会重视人文社会科学教育的氛围等。
The relationship among people, institution and economic activity (or behavior) is generally being concerned. The core of Institutional Change Theory is to research the interaction between the institution and people's behavior. Since Chinese reform and opening up to the outside world 30 years ago, the transformation from the system of planned economy into the system of market economy enabled its economy to develop rapidly. Our scholars take more account of the institutional effect on economic growth, instead of the relationship between people and institution (change).
In recent years, our country has been carrying out a new round of political reform, such as the reform of large ministry, and taking the institutional change into the focus of the work of the government. As it is known to all, human being (the key actor of politicians called by Fligstein or Yao Yang) plays the most important role in the process of institutional change. According to researches by Ruttan etc., the knowledge of humanities and social science possessed by people has a profound and fundamental effect on the institutional change. In modern conditions, an education is undoubtedly one of main approaches of expanding culture and learning knowledge, and the humanities and social science education is the main resource of the knowledge of humanities and social science. Objectively speaking, the progress on the humanities and social science education of our country is not satisfactory. The study on contribution of the humanities and social science education to institutional change lags behind theoretical demand on reforming of political and economic system in our country. Based on requirement of both reality and theory, this paper takes the humanities and social science education as an institutional ability source of institutional actors, and takes the division of work on humanities and social science education as the important factor to institutional change. And we reveal the internal mechanism of institutional change induced by humanities and social science education, and the effects of social division of labor caused by the humanities and social science education in university. Furthermore, we develop theoretical hypotheses of Ruttan and so on and provide a certain theoretical evidence for the development of humanities and social science education in university.
In this paper, we analyze the humanities and social science education in university from institutional supply and social division of work to analysis from the insight of the institutional change supplier and the social division of labor, and expect to design a theoretical model that demonstrates the effect of humanities and social science education in university on the institutional change.
Firstly, the paper reviews the researches at home and abroad on the institutional change, knowledge of humanities and social science and division of labor from two aspects of institutional change theory and division of labor theory. We argue that the institutional actor and the institutional supply capability play a crucial role in the institutional change, and that the division of labor makes the institutional change deeper continuously. Meanwhile, taking the institutional supply as the mainline, we present the mechanism of the humanities and social science education to the effective supply of institutional change under the actuation of this kind of supply, and analyze the effect of the division of labor to the knowledge construction of institutional actor and society. Thus, we propose a theoretical framework that demonstrates the effect of humanities and social science education in university on the institutional change.
Secondly, this paper takes the Institutional Economics as the theoretical basis and holds that the behavioral foundation based on the cost of process of institutional supply depends on the rationality degree of innovation preference, thinking habits and mental model of behavioral main bodies of supplying the institution, and to a certain extent of rationality is also the vital elements to determine the cost of institutional change whether or not to be at least. The supply motivation, the supply way and capability is the most important factor to effect the institutional supply. The humanities and social science education in university resorts to four kinds of effects of institutional change: capability effect, information effect, motive effect and resource allocation effect. Through improving the rationality degree of institutional actors, the effective institutional change can be pushed forward.
Thirdly, through applying of the division of labor theory on the educational division, we analyze the interrelation between two of the division, and present the path and way of institutional change promoted by the humanities and social science knowledge in university and the development of education. The educational division of labor makes the social organizational construction further to divide, and provides more carriers of humanities and social science knowledge. Accordingly, there are more quantities of talents of non-technological improvement in social division of labor to make better the knowledge stock and construction of institutional supply, thus to improve the effectiveness of institutional change.
Fourthly, using method of regression analysis, we analyze quantitatively the correlation between the humanities and social science education on universities and colleges and institutional change of our country during the period from 1987 to 2004. Statistics show that the teachers and graduates from humanities and social science education have quite an impact on Macro-economic institutional change, supporting the theory analysis.
Lastly, according to the result of empirical analysis, aimed at the actual development of humanities and social science education on universities and colleges of our country, we conclude and provide some policy suggestions: strengthening quality oriented education of humanities and social science and advocating the integration of human spirit and science spirit; assuring the essential proportion of humanities and social science education and constructing the spiritual home of Chinese nationality; keeping on promoting the teaching reform of higher education and doing well the subject construction of humanities and social science; reinforcing guidance and creating the atmosphere that all of the society pay attention to the humanities and social science education, etc..
近年来,国家又在进行新一轮政治体制改革(如大部制改革等),再一次将制度变迁纳入政府的工作重点。在制度变迁过程中,人——弗里格斯特、姚洋所称的政治家中的关键行动者——扮演了最为重要的角色。拉坦等人的研究表明,人所具备的人文社会科学知识对制度变迁有着深远而基础性的影响。在现代条件下,教育无疑是传递文化、修习知识最主要的途径之一,人文社会科学教育是人文社会科学知识的主要供给源。从客观上讲,我国人文社会科学教育的发展并不令人满意。人文社会科学教育对制度变迁的影响的研究,相对于我国政治、经济体制改革的理论需要来讲显得有些滞后。基于现实和理论的双重需要,本文将人文社会科学教育作为制度行为人的制度能力供给源,将人文社会科学教育分工作为制度变迁的重要影响因素,揭示人文社会科学教育推动制度变迁的内在机制,以及高校人文社会科学教育对社会分工的影响,进一步拓展拉坦等人的理论假说,为高校人文社会科学教育的发展提供理论依据。
本文从制度供给和社会分工的角度出发,把高校人文社会科学教育作为制度供给源和社会分工的深化工具进行分析,以期构建高校人文社会科学教育对制度变迁作用的理论模型。
文章首先从制度变迁理论和分工理论两个方面回顾了国内外对于制度变迁、人文社会科学知识和分工的研究,认为制度行为人及其制度供给能力在制度变迁中发挥着重要作用,分工使得制度变迁不断深化。同时,以制度供给为主线,阐述了人文社会科学教育对制度供给,进而对制度变迁的作用机制,分析了分工对制度行为人知识结构和社会知识结构的影响,构建起高校人文社会科学教育对制度变迁作用的理论框架。
其次,以制度经济学为理论依据,认为影响制度供给过程成本的行为基础在于制度供给行为主体的创新偏好、思维方式及心智模式的理性程度,而理性程度又是决定制度变迁成本能否实现最小化的重要因素。制度行为人的供给动机、供给方式与供给能力是影响制度供给最主要的因素。高校人文社会科学教育借助于四种制度变迁效应——能力效应、信息效应、动力效应与资源配置效应,通过提高制度行为人的理性程度,促进制度变迁。
第三,将分工理论应用于教育分工的研究,分析了社会化分工与教育分工的相互关系,提出了高校人文社会科学知识及教育的发展促进社会变迁的路径与方式。教育分工促使社会组织结构进一步分化,提供了更多人文社会科学知识的携带者,使得社会分工中非技术性进步的人才增多,从而改善了制度供给的知识存量与结构,提高了制度变迁的有效性。
第四,采用回归分析方法,对1987—2004年我国高等院校人文社会科学教育和我国制度变迁的相关性进行定量分析。统计结果显示,高校人文社会科学教育专任教师数和毕业生数对宏观经济体制转型指数影响显著,支持了理论分析结果。
最后,根据实证分析结果,针对我国高等院校人文社会科学教育的发展实际情况,提出政策建议:加强人文社会科学的素质教育,提倡人文精神和科学精神的融合;保证必要的人文社会科学教育比重,建设中华民族的精神家园;继续推进高等教育教学改革,搞好人文社会科学学科建设;加强引导,营造全社会重视人文社会科学教育的氛围等。
The relationship among people, institution and economic activity (or behavior) is generally being concerned. The core of Institutional Change Theory is to research the interaction between the institution and people's behavior. Since Chinese reform and opening up to the outside world 30 years ago, the transformation from the system of planned economy into the system of market economy enabled its economy to develop rapidly. Our scholars take more account of the institutional effect on economic growth, instead of the relationship between people and institution (change).
In recent years, our country has been carrying out a new round of political reform, such as the reform of large ministry, and taking the institutional change into the focus of the work of the government. As it is known to all, human being (the key actor of politicians called by Fligstein or Yao Yang) plays the most important role in the process of institutional change. According to researches by Ruttan etc., the knowledge of humanities and social science possessed by people has a profound and fundamental effect on the institutional change. In modern conditions, an education is undoubtedly one of main approaches of expanding culture and learning knowledge, and the humanities and social science education is the main resource of the knowledge of humanities and social science. Objectively speaking, the progress on the humanities and social science education of our country is not satisfactory. The study on contribution of the humanities and social science education to institutional change lags behind theoretical demand on reforming of political and economic system in our country. Based on requirement of both reality and theory, this paper takes the humanities and social science education as an institutional ability source of institutional actors, and takes the division of work on humanities and social science education as the important factor to institutional change. And we reveal the internal mechanism of institutional change induced by humanities and social science education, and the effects of social division of labor caused by the humanities and social science education in university. Furthermore, we develop theoretical hypotheses of Ruttan and so on and provide a certain theoretical evidence for the development of humanities and social science education in university.
In this paper, we analyze the humanities and social science education in university from institutional supply and social division of work to analysis from the insight of the institutional change supplier and the social division of labor, and expect to design a theoretical model that demonstrates the effect of humanities and social science education in university on the institutional change.
Firstly, the paper reviews the researches at home and abroad on the institutional change, knowledge of humanities and social science and division of labor from two aspects of institutional change theory and division of labor theory. We argue that the institutional actor and the institutional supply capability play a crucial role in the institutional change, and that the division of labor makes the institutional change deeper continuously. Meanwhile, taking the institutional supply as the mainline, we present the mechanism of the humanities and social science education to the effective supply of institutional change under the actuation of this kind of supply, and analyze the effect of the division of labor to the knowledge construction of institutional actor and society. Thus, we propose a theoretical framework that demonstrates the effect of humanities and social science education in university on the institutional change.
Secondly, this paper takes the Institutional Economics as the theoretical basis and holds that the behavioral foundation based on the cost of process of institutional supply depends on the rationality degree of innovation preference, thinking habits and mental model of behavioral main bodies of supplying the institution, and to a certain extent of rationality is also the vital elements to determine the cost of institutional change whether or not to be at least. The supply motivation, the supply way and capability is the most important factor to effect the institutional supply. The humanities and social science education in university resorts to four kinds of effects of institutional change: capability effect, information effect, motive effect and resource allocation effect. Through improving the rationality degree of institutional actors, the effective institutional change can be pushed forward.
Thirdly, through applying of the division of labor theory on the educational division, we analyze the interrelation between two of the division, and present the path and way of institutional change promoted by the humanities and social science knowledge in university and the development of education. The educational division of labor makes the social organizational construction further to divide, and provides more carriers of humanities and social science knowledge. Accordingly, there are more quantities of talents of non-technological improvement in social division of labor to make better the knowledge stock and construction of institutional supply, thus to improve the effectiveness of institutional change.
Fourthly, using method of regression analysis, we analyze quantitatively the correlation between the humanities and social science education on universities and colleges and institutional change of our country during the period from 1987 to 2004. Statistics show that the teachers and graduates from humanities and social science education have quite an impact on Macro-economic institutional change, supporting the theory analysis.
Lastly, according to the result of empirical analysis, aimed at the actual development of humanities and social science education on universities and colleges of our country, we conclude and provide some policy suggestions: strengthening quality oriented education of humanities and social science and advocating the integration of human spirit and science spirit; assuring the essential proportion of humanities and social science education and constructing the spiritual home of Chinese nationality; keeping on promoting the teaching reform of higher education and doing well the subject construction of humanities and social science; reinforcing guidance and creating the atmosphere that all of the society pay attention to the humanities and social science education, etc..
引文
1. Arthur, W. B. (1991). Designing Economic Agents that Act like Human Agents: A Behavioral Approach to Bounded Rationality. The American Economic Review, 81, 353-359.
2. Arthur, W. B. (1994). Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
3. Barro, R. J., & Sala-I-Martin, X. (1995). Economic Growth. New York:McGraw-Hill Inc.
4. Basalla, G. (1998). The Evolution of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Becker, G. S., Murphy, K. M. & Tamura, R. (1990). Human Capital,Fertility, and Economic Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, s12-s37.
6. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Coase, R. H. (1992). The Institutional Structure of Production. The American Economic Review, 82, 713-719.
8. Coase, R. H. (1998). The New Institutional Economics. The American Economic Review, 88,72-74.
9. David, A. P. (1988). Path Dependence: Putting the Past into the Future of Economics. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Science Technical Report. Palaolto: Standford University Press.
10. Davis, L. E., & North, D. C. (1971). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Denzau, A. T., & North, D. C. (1994). Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions. Kyklos: Blackwell Publishing, 47, 3-31.
12. Dosi, G., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). An Introduction to Evolutionary Theory in Economics. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 4, 153-172.
13. Dugger, W. M. (1995). Douglass C. North's New Institutionalism. Journal of Economic Issues, 29(2), 453-461.
14. Fligstein, N. (1985). The Spread of the Multidivisional Form among Large Firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50,377-391.
15. Foss, N. J. (1998). Market Process Economics and the Theory of the Firm. http://ep.lib.cbs.dk/download/ISBN/8778690250.pdf/1998-08-14. [Accessed on 5~(th) Oct, 2008]
16. Friedman, D. (1998). Evolutionary Economics Goes Mainstream: A Review of the Theory of Learning in Games. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 8,423-432.
17. Greif, A., Migrom, P., & Weingast, B. R. (1994). Coordination,Commitment, and Enforcement: The Case of the Merchant Guild. Journal of Political Economy, 102(4), 745-776.
18. Hayek, F. A. (1937). Economics and Knowledge. Economica, IV, 33-54.
19. Hayek, F. A. (1967). Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Hayek, F. A. (1979). The Counter Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
21. Hayek, F. A. (1988). The Fatal Conceit: the Errors of Socialism. In W. W.Bartley (Ed.), Vol.1 of the Collected Works of F.A. Hayek. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
22. Hosseini, H. (2001). Uncertainty and Perceptual Problems causing government failures in less advanced nations. Journal of Socio-Economics,33,263-271.
23. Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and Entrepreneurship. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
24. Kirzner, I. M. (1992). The Meaning of Market Process: Essays in the Development of Modern Austrian Economics. London: Routledge.
25. Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: an Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature,35(1), 60-85.
26. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Knight, J. (1996). Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Lin, J. Y. (1989). An Economic Theory of Institutional Change: Induced and Imposed Change. The Spring Summer Journal, 9(1), 1-35.
29. Loasby, B. J. (1998). The Organization of Capabilities. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 35, 139-160.
30. Loasby, B. J. (1999). Knowledge, Institutions and Evolution in Economics. London: Routledge.
31. Loasby, B. J. (2000). Market Institutions and Economic Evolution. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10(3), 297-309.
32. Loasby, B. J. (2001). Time, Knowledge and Evolutionary Dynamics: Why Connections Matter. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 11(4), 393-412.
33. Mantzavinos, C, North, D. C, & Shariq, S. (2004b). Learning, Institutions and Economic Performance. Perspectives on Politics, 2, 1-21.
34. Menger, C, Nock, F. J., & Schneider, L. (1963). Problems in Economics and Sociology. Urben: University of Illinois Press.
35. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
36. North, D. C, & Thomas, R. P. (1973). The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History (pp. 179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. North, D. C. (1981). Structure and Change in Economic History. New York:Norton.
38. North, D. C. (1991). Institutional Change and Economic Performance.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. North, D. C. (1993). The New Institutional Economics and Development.Working paper, Washington University.
40. North, D. C. (1994). Economic Performance through Time. American Economic Review, 84(3), 359-368.
41. North, D. C. (1996). Economics and Cognitive Science. Working paper,Washington University.
42. North, D. C. (1997). Some Fundamental Puzzles in Economic History. In W.B. Arthur, S. N. Durlauf, & D. A. Lane (Eds.), The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II. Reading. Mass: Perseus Books.
43. North, D. C. (2004a). A Theory of Economic Change. Science, Vol. 219.
44. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
45. Oakley, A. (1999). The Revival of Modern Austrian Economics: A Critical Assessment of its Subjectivist Origins. Edward Elgar Publishing.
46. Olson, M. (1993). Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development. American Political Science Review, 87, 567-576.
47. Potts, J. (2000). The New Evolutionary Microeconomics: Complexity,Competence, and Adaptive Behaviour. Edward Elgar.
48. Romer,P.(1986).Increasing Returns and Long-Run Gvowth.Joumal of Political Economy, 94,1002-1037.
49. Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102.
50. Romer, P. (1993). Two Strategies for Economic Development: Using Ideas and Producing Ideas. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Research Conference 1992 (pp. 63-91). Supplement to the 21 World Bank Economic Review.
51. Ruttan, V. W. (1978). Induced Institutional Change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
52. Ruttan, V. W., & Hayami, Y. (1984). Toward a Theory of Induced Institutional Innovation. Journal of Development Studies, 20(4), 203-223.
53. Ruttan, V. W. (1997). Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence: Sources of Technical Change. Economic Journal, 107(444),1520-1547.
54. Ruttan, V. W. (2003). Social Science Knowledge and Economic Development (pp. 3, 6, 19, 29, 69). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
55. Schultz, T. W. (1968). Institutions and the Rising Economic Value of Man.American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 50, 21-35.
56. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
57. Simon, H. A. (1960). The Corporation: Will it be Managed by Machines? In M. L. Anshen, & G. L. Bach (Eds.), Management and the Corporations (1985 ed., pp. 17-55). New York: McGraw-Hill.
58. Simon, H. A. (1986). Rationality in Psychology and Economics. In R. M.Hogarth, M. W. Reder, & J. Kenneth (Eds.), Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59. Solow, R. A. (1956). Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Economic, 70, 65-94.
60. Stiglitz, J., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information. American Economic Review, 3, 393-410.
61. Ulrich, W. (1993). Evolutionary Economics. England: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
62. Wallis, J. J., & North, D. C. (1986). Measuring the Transaction Sector in the American Economy,1870-1970.In S.L.Engerman,& R.E.Callman(Eds.),Long-term Factors in American Economic Growth.Chicago:University of Chicago.
63.Williamson,O.E.(1975).Markets and Hierachies.New York:The Free Press.
64.Willamson,O.E.(2000).The New Institutional Economics:Taking Stock,Looking Ahead.Journal of Economics Literature,9,595-613.
65.Witt,U.(1989).The Evolution of Economic Institution as a Propagation Process.Public Choice,62(2),155-172.
66.Young,A.J.(1928).Increasing Returns and Economic Progress.Economic Journal,38,527-542.
67.Yang,X.,& Borland,J.(1991).A Microeconomic Mechanism for Economic Growth.The Journal of Political Economy,99,460-482.
68.阿里·卡赞西吉尔,大卫·马金森著.黄长著,等译.(1992),.世界社会科学报告1999(pp.2-4,).北京:社会科学文献出版社.
69.阿瑟·刘易斯.(1996),.经济增长理论(pp.167,176,190,).上海:上海三联书店.
70.埃瑞克·G·菲吕博顿,鲁道夫·瑞切特.(1998),.新制度经济学.上海:上海财经大学出版社.
71.安立仁.(2007,).中国经济制度变迁动力分析.西北大学学报哲学社会科学版,5,41-46.
72.奥尔森.(1995),.集体行动的逻辑.上海三联书店,上海:上海人民出版社.
73.奥利弗·E·威廉姆森.(2004),.资本主义经济制度:论企业签约与市场签约.北京:商务印书馆.
74.保罗·G·黑尔.(2004),.转型时期的制度变迁和经济发展.经济社会体制比较,5,1-11.
75.曹正汉.(2001).将社会价值观整合到制度变迁理论之中的三种方法.经济科学,6,96-15.
76.陈道江.(2004),.经济学的新发展:演化经济理论的回顾与展望.学海,1,155-161.
77.传承发展优秀历史文化.光明日报.(2007-04-19,第10版).
78.戴维斯,诺斯.(1994).制度变迁的理论:概念与原因.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.266-294).上海:上海三联书店.
79.戴维斯,诺斯.(1994).制度创新的理论:描述、类推与说明.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.295-326).上海:上海三联书店.
80.丁华仙.(2001).论企业家创新的认知模式.江苏市场经济,3,37-43.
81.发展知识经济自然科学/社会科学哪个更重要.http://www.perfspot.com/video2/video.asp?id=325600147/2006-10-07.
82.凡勃伦.(1964,).有闲阶级论:关于制度的经济学研究(pp.139),.北京:商务印书馆.
83.樊纲.(1993),.两种改革成本与两种改革方式.经济研究,1,3-15.
84.方统法.(2003),.组织设计的知识基础论.上海:复旦大学.
85.弗兰克·H·T·罗德斯.(2007),.创造未来——美国大学的作用.北京:清华大学出版社.
86.富兰克·H·奈特.(2005),.风险不确定性和利润.北京:中国人民大学出版社.
87.高勇强.(2007),.政治企业家的制度创新模式.公共管理学报,1,62-69.
88.龚放.(1997),.试论大学素质教育.教育研究,11,14-20.
89.郭剑雄.(2000),.社会科学、制度变迁与经济增长.学海,3,73-77.
90.郭剑雄.(2001).社会科学与经济增长.社会科学辑刊,3,70-74.
91.郭英剑.(2008),.哲学何以成了热门专业.科学时报.(04月29日,第7版).
92.哈耶克.(2003),.个人主义与经济秩序.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店.
93.黄少安,刘海英.(1996),.制度变迁的强制性与诱致性——兼对新制度经济学和林毅夫先生所做区分评析.经济学动态,4,60-63.
94.贾根良.(2004),.奥地利学派的演进、传统与突变.社会科学战线,3,65-71.
95.贾根良.(2004),.理解演化经济学.中国社会科学,2,33-41.
96.金玉国,崔友平.(2006a),.经济发展、体制转型与交易费用的实证分析.财经科学,2,84-90.
97.金玉国.(2001).宏观制度变迁对转型时期中国经济增长的贡献.财经科 学,2,24-28.
98.金玉国.(2006b).中国交易费用变动的动态机制和传导路径.财经研究,12.121-129.
99.柯武刚,史曼飞.(2000),.制度经济学:社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆.
100.克劳德·梅纳尔.(2003),.制度、契约与组织——从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社.
101.拉坦.(1994).诱致性制度变迁理论.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.327-370,).上海:上海三联书店.
102.李立国,石邦宏.(2002),.美国高校人文社科教育的改革与发展.清华大学教育研究,3,59-64.
103.李卫华.(2004),.国民精神素质与国家兴衰.改革,4,118-121.
104.林廷春.(2005),.高等教育在经济发展中的作用:对台湾的实证研究.教育与经济,1,50-54.
105.林毅夫.(1994),.关于制度变迁的经济学理论——诱致性变迁与强制性变迁.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.371-418).上海:上海三联书店.
106.刘大椿.(1993),.阿波罗精神和狄奥尼索斯精神:论自然科学与社会科学的相互渗透.学术月刊,11,58-62.
107.刘大椿.(2003,).中国人文社会科学发展研究报告2002(pp.6-12,16-28).北京:中国人民大学出版社.
108.刘和旺.(2006),.不确定性学习与制度演化.生产力研究,6,27-29.
109.卢现祥.(2004,).新制度经济学(pp.3-7,106-114,146,151-157,172-174).武汉:武汉大学出版社.
110.路甬祥,王沛民.(1996),.工业创新和高等工程教育改革.中国大学教学,3,4-8.
111.米运生,龙柏林.(2000).试论政治企业家主导型制度变迁:中国经济体制改革的一种理论假说.宁夏党校学报,5,45-49.
112.诺斯.(1994,).经济史中的结构与变迁(pp.232,).上海:上海三联书店.
113.诺斯.(1991).论制度.经济社会体制比较,6,55-64.
114.诺斯.(1999),.西方世界的兴起.北京:华夏出版社.
115.诺斯.(1994).制度、制度变迁与经济绩效(PP.112).上海:上海三联书店.
116.青木昌彦,奥野正宽.(1999),.经济体制的比较制度分析.北京:中国发展出版社.
117.青木昌彦.(2001).比较制度分析(pp.3).上海:上海远东出版社.
118.青木昌彦.(2000),.什么是制度?我们如何理解制度.经济社会体制比较,6.28-38.
119.盛洪.(2005),.如何将经济增长转变为文化繁荣.http://www.dajun.com.cn/wenhua.htm/2005-07-01.
120.舒尔茨.(2001).报酬递增的源泉.北京:北京大学出版社.
121.斯密.(1999),.国富论.西安:陕西人民出版社.
122.苏永通.(2008),.解码1300名省级地方官.南方周末.(03月13日,第10版).
123.孙圣民.(2006),.制度变迁理论的比较与综合.中国财经政法大学学报,3,30-34.
124.孙圣民.(2006),.制度变迁视角的意识形态理论分析.经济评论,6,59-67.
125.锁利铭.(2007),.基于制度变迁的政府转型动力及实施机制研究.成都:西南交通大学.
126.唐晓云.(2002),.关于制度变迁与经济增长的几点认识.当代财经,3,3.6.
127.汪丁丁.(1992),.制度创新的一般理论.经济研究,5,69-80.
128.汪丁丁.(1994),.近来经济发展理论的简述与思考.经济研究,7,66-80.
129.汪丁丁.(1995),.经济学的关键词.读书,7,71-76.
130.汪丁丁.(1995a),.从“交易费用”到博弈均衡.经济研究,9,72-80.
131.汪丁丁.(1995b).知识的经济学性质.读书,12,57-62.
132.汪丁丁.(1995c),.知识社会与知识分子.读书,11,82-88.
133.汪丁丁.(1995d),.再谈经济学的关键词.读书,8,80-86.
134.汪丁丁.(2002),.知识分工与CKO.IT经理世界,2,86.
135.汪丁丁.(2003),.社会科学及制度经济学概论.社会科学战线,3,182-190.
136.汪丁丁.(2006),.知识社会与知识资产问题.经济导刊,7,93-96.
137.王冰,杨虎涛.(2003),.制度变迁与两类企业家的作用——奥地利学派企业家理论的拓展与应用.当代经济研究,12,53-57.
138.王瑞泽,陈德山.(2006).经济增长模型中的制度变量及其代理变量的选择:一个文献综述.山东经济,2,14-18.
139.王瑞泽.(2006).制度变迁下的中国经济增长研究.北京:首都经济贸易大学.
140.王守法.(2006).高等教育对经济发展的贡献研究.长沙:湖南大学.
141.王廷惠.(2005).制度功能、演化与有效制度标准:市场边程理论的理解.见黄少安(编辑),制度经济学研究.(Vol.10~(th),pp.28-44).北京:经济科学出版社.
142.王文博,陈昌兵,徐海燕.(2002),.包含制度因素的中国经济增长模型及实证分析.当代经济科学,2,33-37.
143.王文贵.(2006),.非正式制度与经济发展一个总括性分析.江汉论坛,6,70-73.
144.魏旭,张艳.(2006),.知识分工、社会资本与集群式创新网络的演化.当代经济研究,10,24-27.
145.希克斯.(1987,).经济史理论(pp.46,).北京:商务印书馆.
146.熊彼特.(1996),.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆.
147.徐智德,朱俊峰.(1997),.我国高校人文社科教育的现状和对策.黑龙江高教研究,5,22-25.
148.薛宏雨.(2004),.制度创新在经济增长中作用的测算.财经问题研究,9,3-8.
149.薛澜,陶海青,刘冰.(2004),.全过程的包容认知模式及其在网络化时代的趋势.科学学与科学技术管理,10,128-133.
150.杨东平.(2004),.教育产业化争议辨析.南方周末.(10月13日).
151.杨龙,戴扬.(2006),.论制度的结构功能与绩效.理论与改革,2,10-12.
152.杨瑞龙,邢华.(2007),.科斯定理与国家理论.学术月刊,1,84-90.
153.杨小凯,黄有光.(1999),.专业化与经济组织——一种新兴古典微观经济学框架.北京:经济科学出版社.
154.杨小凯.(1998).经济学原理.北京:中国社会科学出版社.
155.杨中旭.(2005).中国多名省部级官员履新,隐含高层治国方略调整.中国新闻周刊.(01月10日).
156.姚洋.(2003).政治过程与有效制度变迁.见黄少安(编辑),制度经济学 研究.(Vol.1~(st),pp.1-16,).北京:经济科学出版社.
157.姚洋.(2002,).制度与效率——与诺斯对话(pp.263-265).成都:四川人民出版社.
158.张金福.(2006,).大学人文教育与科学教育结合研究(pp.226-233).杭州:浙江大学出版社.
159.张林.(2003).凡勃伦的制度变迁理论解读.经济学家,3,104-110.
160.张朋柱,薛耀文.(2002).博弈者认知模式与合作意愿度分析.管理科学学报,5,1-9.
161.张旭昆.(2002).制度的定义与分类.浙江社会科学,6,3-9.
162.张玉新.(2005).基于分布知识的企业理论.长春:吉林大学.
163.章华.(2003).认知模式与制度创新.浙江社会科学,5,44-48.
164.章华.(2005).认知模式与制度演化分析.浙江社会科学,4,52-58.
165.章平,戴燕.(2006).个体决策与学习行为有限理性建模综述.南开经济研究,3,116-128.
166.章奇,刘明兴.(2005).意识形态与政府干预.经济学季刊,2,335-358.
167.赵筱媛,苏竣.(2005),.世界一流研究型大学中人文社会科学的作用及发展趋势.高等教育研究,10,11-17.
168.郑春光.(2006).博弈、知识与教育.上海:华东师范大学.
169.中国人民共和国教育部.(2002).跨世纪中国教育.北京:高等教育出版社.
170.钟归大海作波涛:高校“十五”哲学社会科学成就巡礼.http://www.moe.gov.cn/edoas/website18/77/info20877.htm/2006-11-09.
171.周冰,靳涛.(2004).青木昌彦的制度观与制度演化的进化博弈思想评析.江苏社会科学,3,59-65.
172.周其仁.(2000).制度企业家麦高文.IT经理世界,21,199-221.
173.周业安,赖步连.(2005).认知、学习和制度研究:新制度经济学的困境和发展.中国人民大学学报,1,74-80.
174.周业安.(2004).制度演化理论的新发展.教育与研究,4,63-70.
175.朱锡庆.(2007).重读斯密.南方周末.(01月25日).
176.朱振国.(2006).高校哲学社会科学成绩显著.光明日报.(02月15日).
2. Arthur, W. B. (1994). Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
3. Barro, R. J., & Sala-I-Martin, X. (1995). Economic Growth. New York:McGraw-Hill Inc.
4. Basalla, G. (1998). The Evolution of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Becker, G. S., Murphy, K. M. & Tamura, R. (1990). Human Capital,Fertility, and Economic Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, s12-s37.
6. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Coase, R. H. (1992). The Institutional Structure of Production. The American Economic Review, 82, 713-719.
8. Coase, R. H. (1998). The New Institutional Economics. The American Economic Review, 88,72-74.
9. David, A. P. (1988). Path Dependence: Putting the Past into the Future of Economics. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Science Technical Report. Palaolto: Standford University Press.
10. Davis, L. E., & North, D. C. (1971). Institutional Change and American Economic Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Denzau, A. T., & North, D. C. (1994). Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions. Kyklos: Blackwell Publishing, 47, 3-31.
12. Dosi, G., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). An Introduction to Evolutionary Theory in Economics. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 4, 153-172.
13. Dugger, W. M. (1995). Douglass C. North's New Institutionalism. Journal of Economic Issues, 29(2), 453-461.
14. Fligstein, N. (1985). The Spread of the Multidivisional Form among Large Firms, 1919-1979. American Sociological Review, 50,377-391.
15. Foss, N. J. (1998). Market Process Economics and the Theory of the Firm. http://ep.lib.cbs.dk/download/ISBN/8778690250.pdf/1998-08-14. [Accessed on 5~(th) Oct, 2008]
16. Friedman, D. (1998). Evolutionary Economics Goes Mainstream: A Review of the Theory of Learning in Games. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 8,423-432.
17. Greif, A., Migrom, P., & Weingast, B. R. (1994). Coordination,Commitment, and Enforcement: The Case of the Merchant Guild. Journal of Political Economy, 102(4), 745-776.
18. Hayek, F. A. (1937). Economics and Knowledge. Economica, IV, 33-54.
19. Hayek, F. A. (1967). Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Hayek, F. A. (1979). The Counter Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason (2nd ed.). Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
21. Hayek, F. A. (1988). The Fatal Conceit: the Errors of Socialism. In W. W.Bartley (Ed.), Vol.1 of the Collected Works of F.A. Hayek. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
22. Hosseini, H. (2001). Uncertainty and Perceptual Problems causing government failures in less advanced nations. Journal of Socio-Economics,33,263-271.
23. Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and Entrepreneurship. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
24. Kirzner, I. M. (1992). The Meaning of Market Process: Essays in the Development of Modern Austrian Economics. London: Routledge.
25. Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: an Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature,35(1), 60-85.
26. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Knight, J. (1996). Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Lin, J. Y. (1989). An Economic Theory of Institutional Change: Induced and Imposed Change. The Spring Summer Journal, 9(1), 1-35.
29. Loasby, B. J. (1998). The Organization of Capabilities. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 35, 139-160.
30. Loasby, B. J. (1999). Knowledge, Institutions and Evolution in Economics. London: Routledge.
31. Loasby, B. J. (2000). Market Institutions and Economic Evolution. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10(3), 297-309.
32. Loasby, B. J. (2001). Time, Knowledge and Evolutionary Dynamics: Why Connections Matter. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 11(4), 393-412.
33. Mantzavinos, C, North, D. C, & Shariq, S. (2004b). Learning, Institutions and Economic Performance. Perspectives on Politics, 2, 1-21.
34. Menger, C, Nock, F. J., & Schneider, L. (1963). Problems in Economics and Sociology. Urben: University of Illinois Press.
35. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
36. North, D. C, & Thomas, R. P. (1973). The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History (pp. 179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. North, D. C. (1981). Structure and Change in Economic History. New York:Norton.
38. North, D. C. (1991). Institutional Change and Economic Performance.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. North, D. C. (1993). The New Institutional Economics and Development.Working paper, Washington University.
40. North, D. C. (1994). Economic Performance through Time. American Economic Review, 84(3), 359-368.
41. North, D. C. (1996). Economics and Cognitive Science. Working paper,Washington University.
42. North, D. C. (1997). Some Fundamental Puzzles in Economic History. In W.B. Arthur, S. N. Durlauf, & D. A. Lane (Eds.), The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II. Reading. Mass: Perseus Books.
43. North, D. C. (2004a). A Theory of Economic Change. Science, Vol. 219.
44. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
45. Oakley, A. (1999). The Revival of Modern Austrian Economics: A Critical Assessment of its Subjectivist Origins. Edward Elgar Publishing.
46. Olson, M. (1993). Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development. American Political Science Review, 87, 567-576.
47. Potts, J. (2000). The New Evolutionary Microeconomics: Complexity,Competence, and Adaptive Behaviour. Edward Elgar.
48. Romer,P.(1986).Increasing Returns and Long-Run Gvowth.Joumal of Political Economy, 94,1002-1037.
49. Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102.
50. Romer, P. (1993). Two Strategies for Economic Development: Using Ideas and Producing Ideas. Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Research Conference 1992 (pp. 63-91). Supplement to the 21 World Bank Economic Review.
51. Ruttan, V. W. (1978). Induced Institutional Change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
52. Ruttan, V. W., & Hayami, Y. (1984). Toward a Theory of Induced Institutional Innovation. Journal of Development Studies, 20(4), 203-223.
53. Ruttan, V. W. (1997). Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence: Sources of Technical Change. Economic Journal, 107(444),1520-1547.
54. Ruttan, V. W. (2003). Social Science Knowledge and Economic Development (pp. 3, 6, 19, 29, 69). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
55. Schultz, T. W. (1968). Institutions and the Rising Economic Value of Man.American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 50, 21-35.
56. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
57. Simon, H. A. (1960). The Corporation: Will it be Managed by Machines? In M. L. Anshen, & G. L. Bach (Eds.), Management and the Corporations (1985 ed., pp. 17-55). New York: McGraw-Hill.
58. Simon, H. A. (1986). Rationality in Psychology and Economics. In R. M.Hogarth, M. W. Reder, & J. Kenneth (Eds.), Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59. Solow, R. A. (1956). Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Economic, 70, 65-94.
60. Stiglitz, J., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information. American Economic Review, 3, 393-410.
61. Ulrich, W. (1993). Evolutionary Economics. England: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
62. Wallis, J. J., & North, D. C. (1986). Measuring the Transaction Sector in the American Economy,1870-1970.In S.L.Engerman,& R.E.Callman(Eds.),Long-term Factors in American Economic Growth.Chicago:University of Chicago.
63.Williamson,O.E.(1975).Markets and Hierachies.New York:The Free Press.
64.Willamson,O.E.(2000).The New Institutional Economics:Taking Stock,Looking Ahead.Journal of Economics Literature,9,595-613.
65.Witt,U.(1989).The Evolution of Economic Institution as a Propagation Process.Public Choice,62(2),155-172.
66.Young,A.J.(1928).Increasing Returns and Economic Progress.Economic Journal,38,527-542.
67.Yang,X.,& Borland,J.(1991).A Microeconomic Mechanism for Economic Growth.The Journal of Political Economy,99,460-482.
68.阿里·卡赞西吉尔,大卫·马金森著.黄长著,等译.(1992),.世界社会科学报告1999(pp.2-4,).北京:社会科学文献出版社.
69.阿瑟·刘易斯.(1996),.经济增长理论(pp.167,176,190,).上海:上海三联书店.
70.埃瑞克·G·菲吕博顿,鲁道夫·瑞切特.(1998),.新制度经济学.上海:上海财经大学出版社.
71.安立仁.(2007,).中国经济制度变迁动力分析.西北大学学报哲学社会科学版,5,41-46.
72.奥尔森.(1995),.集体行动的逻辑.上海三联书店,上海:上海人民出版社.
73.奥利弗·E·威廉姆森.(2004),.资本主义经济制度:论企业签约与市场签约.北京:商务印书馆.
74.保罗·G·黑尔.(2004),.转型时期的制度变迁和经济发展.经济社会体制比较,5,1-11.
75.曹正汉.(2001).将社会价值观整合到制度变迁理论之中的三种方法.经济科学,6,96-15.
76.陈道江.(2004),.经济学的新发展:演化经济理论的回顾与展望.学海,1,155-161.
77.传承发展优秀历史文化.光明日报.(2007-04-19,第10版).
78.戴维斯,诺斯.(1994).制度变迁的理论:概念与原因.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.266-294).上海:上海三联书店.
79.戴维斯,诺斯.(1994).制度创新的理论:描述、类推与说明.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.295-326).上海:上海三联书店.
80.丁华仙.(2001).论企业家创新的认知模式.江苏市场经济,3,37-43.
81.发展知识经济自然科学/社会科学哪个更重要.http://www.perfspot.com/video2/video.asp?id=325600147/2006-10-07.
82.凡勃伦.(1964,).有闲阶级论:关于制度的经济学研究(pp.139),.北京:商务印书馆.
83.樊纲.(1993),.两种改革成本与两种改革方式.经济研究,1,3-15.
84.方统法.(2003),.组织设计的知识基础论.上海:复旦大学.
85.弗兰克·H·T·罗德斯.(2007),.创造未来——美国大学的作用.北京:清华大学出版社.
86.富兰克·H·奈特.(2005),.风险不确定性和利润.北京:中国人民大学出版社.
87.高勇强.(2007),.政治企业家的制度创新模式.公共管理学报,1,62-69.
88.龚放.(1997),.试论大学素质教育.教育研究,11,14-20.
89.郭剑雄.(2000),.社会科学、制度变迁与经济增长.学海,3,73-77.
90.郭剑雄.(2001).社会科学与经济增长.社会科学辑刊,3,70-74.
91.郭英剑.(2008),.哲学何以成了热门专业.科学时报.(04月29日,第7版).
92.哈耶克.(2003),.个人主义与经济秩序.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店.
93.黄少安,刘海英.(1996),.制度变迁的强制性与诱致性——兼对新制度经济学和林毅夫先生所做区分评析.经济学动态,4,60-63.
94.贾根良.(2004),.奥地利学派的演进、传统与突变.社会科学战线,3,65-71.
95.贾根良.(2004),.理解演化经济学.中国社会科学,2,33-41.
96.金玉国,崔友平.(2006a),.经济发展、体制转型与交易费用的实证分析.财经科学,2,84-90.
97.金玉国.(2001).宏观制度变迁对转型时期中国经济增长的贡献.财经科 学,2,24-28.
98.金玉国.(2006b).中国交易费用变动的动态机制和传导路径.财经研究,12.121-129.
99.柯武刚,史曼飞.(2000),.制度经济学:社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆.
100.克劳德·梅纳尔.(2003),.制度、契约与组织——从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社.
101.拉坦.(1994).诱致性制度变迁理论.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.327-370,).上海:上海三联书店.
102.李立国,石邦宏.(2002),.美国高校人文社科教育的改革与发展.清华大学教育研究,3,59-64.
103.李卫华.(2004),.国民精神素质与国家兴衰.改革,4,118-121.
104.林廷春.(2005),.高等教育在经济发展中的作用:对台湾的实证研究.教育与经济,1,50-54.
105.林毅夫.(1994),.关于制度变迁的经济学理论——诱致性变迁与强制性变迁.见刘守英等(译),财产权利与制度变迁(pp.371-418).上海:上海三联书店.
106.刘大椿.(1993),.阿波罗精神和狄奥尼索斯精神:论自然科学与社会科学的相互渗透.学术月刊,11,58-62.
107.刘大椿.(2003,).中国人文社会科学发展研究报告2002(pp.6-12,16-28).北京:中国人民大学出版社.
108.刘和旺.(2006),.不确定性学习与制度演化.生产力研究,6,27-29.
109.卢现祥.(2004,).新制度经济学(pp.3-7,106-114,146,151-157,172-174).武汉:武汉大学出版社.
110.路甬祥,王沛民.(1996),.工业创新和高等工程教育改革.中国大学教学,3,4-8.
111.米运生,龙柏林.(2000).试论政治企业家主导型制度变迁:中国经济体制改革的一种理论假说.宁夏党校学报,5,45-49.
112.诺斯.(1994,).经济史中的结构与变迁(pp.232,).上海:上海三联书店.
113.诺斯.(1991).论制度.经济社会体制比较,6,55-64.
114.诺斯.(1999),.西方世界的兴起.北京:华夏出版社.
115.诺斯.(1994).制度、制度变迁与经济绩效(PP.112).上海:上海三联书店.
116.青木昌彦,奥野正宽.(1999),.经济体制的比较制度分析.北京:中国发展出版社.
117.青木昌彦.(2001).比较制度分析(pp.3).上海:上海远东出版社.
118.青木昌彦.(2000),.什么是制度?我们如何理解制度.经济社会体制比较,6.28-38.
119.盛洪.(2005),.如何将经济增长转变为文化繁荣.http://www.dajun.com.cn/wenhua.htm/2005-07-01.
120.舒尔茨.(2001).报酬递增的源泉.北京:北京大学出版社.
121.斯密.(1999),.国富论.西安:陕西人民出版社.
122.苏永通.(2008),.解码1300名省级地方官.南方周末.(03月13日,第10版).
123.孙圣民.(2006),.制度变迁理论的比较与综合.中国财经政法大学学报,3,30-34.
124.孙圣民.(2006),.制度变迁视角的意识形态理论分析.经济评论,6,59-67.
125.锁利铭.(2007),.基于制度变迁的政府转型动力及实施机制研究.成都:西南交通大学.
126.唐晓云.(2002),.关于制度变迁与经济增长的几点认识.当代财经,3,3.6.
127.汪丁丁.(1992),.制度创新的一般理论.经济研究,5,69-80.
128.汪丁丁.(1994),.近来经济发展理论的简述与思考.经济研究,7,66-80.
129.汪丁丁.(1995),.经济学的关键词.读书,7,71-76.
130.汪丁丁.(1995a),.从“交易费用”到博弈均衡.经济研究,9,72-80.
131.汪丁丁.(1995b).知识的经济学性质.读书,12,57-62.
132.汪丁丁.(1995c),.知识社会与知识分子.读书,11,82-88.
133.汪丁丁.(1995d),.再谈经济学的关键词.读书,8,80-86.
134.汪丁丁.(2002),.知识分工与CKO.IT经理世界,2,86.
135.汪丁丁.(2003),.社会科学及制度经济学概论.社会科学战线,3,182-190.
136.汪丁丁.(2006),.知识社会与知识资产问题.经济导刊,7,93-96.
137.王冰,杨虎涛.(2003),.制度变迁与两类企业家的作用——奥地利学派企业家理论的拓展与应用.当代经济研究,12,53-57.
138.王瑞泽,陈德山.(2006).经济增长模型中的制度变量及其代理变量的选择:一个文献综述.山东经济,2,14-18.
139.王瑞泽.(2006).制度变迁下的中国经济增长研究.北京:首都经济贸易大学.
140.王守法.(2006).高等教育对经济发展的贡献研究.长沙:湖南大学.
141.王廷惠.(2005).制度功能、演化与有效制度标准:市场边程理论的理解.见黄少安(编辑),制度经济学研究.(Vol.10~(th),pp.28-44).北京:经济科学出版社.
142.王文博,陈昌兵,徐海燕.(2002),.包含制度因素的中国经济增长模型及实证分析.当代经济科学,2,33-37.
143.王文贵.(2006),.非正式制度与经济发展一个总括性分析.江汉论坛,6,70-73.
144.魏旭,张艳.(2006),.知识分工、社会资本与集群式创新网络的演化.当代经济研究,10,24-27.
145.希克斯.(1987,).经济史理论(pp.46,).北京:商务印书馆.
146.熊彼特.(1996),.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆.
147.徐智德,朱俊峰.(1997),.我国高校人文社科教育的现状和对策.黑龙江高教研究,5,22-25.
148.薛宏雨.(2004),.制度创新在经济增长中作用的测算.财经问题研究,9,3-8.
149.薛澜,陶海青,刘冰.(2004),.全过程的包容认知模式及其在网络化时代的趋势.科学学与科学技术管理,10,128-133.
150.杨东平.(2004),.教育产业化争议辨析.南方周末.(10月13日).
151.杨龙,戴扬.(2006),.论制度的结构功能与绩效.理论与改革,2,10-12.
152.杨瑞龙,邢华.(2007),.科斯定理与国家理论.学术月刊,1,84-90.
153.杨小凯,黄有光.(1999),.专业化与经济组织——一种新兴古典微观经济学框架.北京:经济科学出版社.
154.杨小凯.(1998).经济学原理.北京:中国社会科学出版社.
155.杨中旭.(2005).中国多名省部级官员履新,隐含高层治国方略调整.中国新闻周刊.(01月10日).
156.姚洋.(2003).政治过程与有效制度变迁.见黄少安(编辑),制度经济学 研究.(Vol.1~(st),pp.1-16,).北京:经济科学出版社.
157.姚洋.(2002,).制度与效率——与诺斯对话(pp.263-265).成都:四川人民出版社.
158.张金福.(2006,).大学人文教育与科学教育结合研究(pp.226-233).杭州:浙江大学出版社.
159.张林.(2003).凡勃伦的制度变迁理论解读.经济学家,3,104-110.
160.张朋柱,薛耀文.(2002).博弈者认知模式与合作意愿度分析.管理科学学报,5,1-9.
161.张旭昆.(2002).制度的定义与分类.浙江社会科学,6,3-9.
162.张玉新.(2005).基于分布知识的企业理论.长春:吉林大学.
163.章华.(2003).认知模式与制度创新.浙江社会科学,5,44-48.
164.章华.(2005).认知模式与制度演化分析.浙江社会科学,4,52-58.
165.章平,戴燕.(2006).个体决策与学习行为有限理性建模综述.南开经济研究,3,116-128.
166.章奇,刘明兴.(2005).意识形态与政府干预.经济学季刊,2,335-358.
167.赵筱媛,苏竣.(2005),.世界一流研究型大学中人文社会科学的作用及发展趋势.高等教育研究,10,11-17.
168.郑春光.(2006).博弈、知识与教育.上海:华东师范大学.
169.中国人民共和国教育部.(2002).跨世纪中国教育.北京:高等教育出版社.
170.钟归大海作波涛:高校“十五”哲学社会科学成就巡礼.http://www.moe.gov.cn/edoas/website18/77/info20877.htm/2006-11-09.
171.周冰,靳涛.(2004).青木昌彦的制度观与制度演化的进化博弈思想评析.江苏社会科学,3,59-65.
172.周其仁.(2000).制度企业家麦高文.IT经理世界,21,199-221.
173.周业安,赖步连.(2005).认知、学习和制度研究:新制度经济学的困境和发展.中国人民大学学报,1,74-80.
174.周业安.(2004).制度演化理论的新发展.教育与研究,4,63-70.
175.朱锡庆.(2007).重读斯密.南方周末.(01月25日).
176.朱振国.(2006).高校哲学社会科学成绩显著.光明日报.(02月15日).