----------------- 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]