----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
1) Those who say Professor Hirschman tries to distance himself from economic imperialism (
in the pejorative sense) are right, I think. He here and there criticizes some studies
that apply economic approach to problems dealt with in other social sciences; for example,
when he writes: "a good portion of our social arrangements is meant to prevent that
equalization-at-the-margin of the satisfactions derived from our various activities which
is the crux of the economic model." ( _ Shifting Involvements_ p. 20), or when he
criticizes such economists as Olson and Becker.
 
2) At the same time, Hirschman sometimes speaks imperialist economists' language , i.e.
the cost-benefit language -- when he gives some attention to "the cost of exit as compared
to the cost of voice." [ 'Social Science Information' 13 ( 1974), p.8]
 
3) The core of economic approach is the concept of cost-benefit analysis, whether on the
individual decision level or on the social level of analysis.
 
4) Some political scientists hold that most of the logic of "exit-voice" theory rests on
so-called  economic or rational choice paradigm and centres around the choice between exit
and voice -- a choice that they show can be thought of in cost-benefit terms.
 
5) In view of what has been said above, isn't exit-voice theory an application of economic
approach, regardless of what Hirschman himself claims?
 
Mohammad Maljoo 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]