The main peak of the crisis of behaviorism, structural-functional analysis and other main methodological trends occurred in the 60-70s. These years were full of attempts to find a new methodological basis for further research. Scientists have tried to do this in different ways:

1. update the "classical" methodological approaches (the emergence of post-behavioral methodological trends, neo-institutionalism, etc.);

2. create a system of "middle level" theories and try to use these theories as a methodological basis;

3. try to create an equivalent of a general theory by referring to classical political theories;

4. turn to Marxism and create on the basis of this various kinds of technocratic theories.

These years are characterized by the emergence of a number of methodological theories that claim to be the "grand theory". One of such theories, one of such methodological directions was the theory of rational choice.

Rational choice theory was designed to overcome the shortcomings of behaviorism, structural-functional analysis and institutionalism, creating a theory of political behavior in which a person would act as an independent, active political actor, a theory that would allow looking at a person’s behavior “from the inside”, taking into account the nature of his attitudes, choice of optimal behavior, etc.

The theory of rational choice came to political science from economic science. The “founding fathers” of the theory of rational choice are considered to be E. Downes (he formulated the main provisions of the theory in his work “The Economic Theory of Democracy”), D. Black (introduced the concept of preferences into political science, described the mechanism for their translation into performance results), G. Simon (substantiated the concept of bounded rationality and demonstrated the possibilities of applying the rational choice paradigm), as well as L. Chapley, M. Shubik, V. Riker, M. Olson, J. Buchanan, G. Tulloch (developed "game theory"). It took about ten years before rational choice theory became widespread in political science.

Proponents of rational choice theory proceed from the following methodological assumptions:

First, methodological individualism, that is, the recognition that social and political structures, politics, and society as a whole are secondary to the individual. It is the individual who produces institutions and relationships through his activity. Therefore, the interests of the individual are determined by him, as well as the order of preferences.

Secondly, the selfishness of the individual, that is, his desire to maximize his own benefit. This does not mean that a person will necessarily behave like an egoist, but even if he behaves like an altruist, then this method is most likely more beneficial for him than others. This applies not only to the behavior of an individual, but also to his behavior in a group when he is not bound by special personal attachments.

Proponents of the theory of rational choice believe that the voter decides whether to come to the polls or not, depending on how he evaluates the benefits of his vote, and also votes based on rational considerations of utility. He can manipulate his political settings if he sees that he may not get a win. Political parties in elections also try to maximize their benefits by enlisting the support of as many voters as possible. Deputies form committees, guided by the need to pass this or that bill, their people to the government, and so on. The bureaucracy in its activities is guided by the desire to increase its organization and its budget, and so on.

Thirdly, the rationality of individuals, that is, their ability to arrange their preferences in accordance with their maximum benefit. As E. Downes wrote, "every time we talk about rational behavior, we mean rational behavior, initially directed towards selfish goals." In this case, the individual correlates the expected results and costs and, trying to maximize the result, tries to minimize costs at the same time. Since the rationalization of behavior and the assessment of the ratio of benefits and costs require the possession of significant information, and its receipt is associated with an increase in overall costs, one speaks of "limited rationality" of the individual. This bounded rationality has more to do with the decision-making procedure itself than with the essence of the decision itself.

Fourth, the exchange of activities. Individuals in society do not act alone, there is an interdependence of people's choices. The behavior of each individual is carried out in certain institutional conditions, that is, under the influence of institutions. These institutional conditions themselves are created by people, but the initial one is people's consent to the exchange of activities. In the process of activity, individuals rather do not adapt to institutions, but try to change them in accordance with their interests. Institutions, in turn, can change the order of preferences, but this only means that the changed order turned out to be beneficial for political actors under given conditions.

Most often, the political process within the framework of the rational choice paradigm is described in the form of public choice theory, or in the form of game theory.

Proponents of the theory of public choice proceed from the fact that in the group the individual behaves selfishly and rationally. He will not voluntarily make special efforts to achieve common goals, but will try to use public goods for free (the “hare” phenomenon in public transport). This is because the nature of a collective good includes such characteristics as non-excludability (that is, no one can be excluded from the use of a public good) and non-rivalry (the consumption of this good by a large number of people does not lead to a decrease in its utility).

Game theorists assume that the political struggle to win, as well as the assumptions of rational choice theory about the universality of such qualities of political actors as selfishness and rationality, make the political process similar to a game with zero or non-zero sum. As is known from the course of general political science, game theory describes the interaction of actors through a certain set of game scenarios. The purpose of such an analysis is to search for such game conditions under which participants choose certain behavior strategies, for example, that are beneficial to all participants at once.

This methodological approach is not free from some shortcomings. One of these shortcomings is the insufficient consideration of social and cultural-historical factors influencing the individual's behavior. The authors of this manual are far from agreeing with researchers who believe that the political behavior of an individual is largely a function of the social structure or with those who argue that the political behavior of actors is in principle incomparable, because it occurs within the framework of unique national conditions and etc. However, it is obvious that the rational choice model does not take into account the influence of the socio-cultural environment on the preferences, motivation and behavioral strategy of political actors, and does not take into account the influence of the specifics of political discourse.

Another shortcoming has to do with the assumption of rational choice theorists about the rationality of behavior. The point is not only that individuals can behave like altruists, and not only that they can have limited information, imperfect qualities. These nuances, as shown above, are explained by the rational choice theory itself. First of all, we are talking about the fact that often people act irrationally under the influence of short-term factors, under the influence of affect, guided, for example, by momentary impulses.

As D. Easton rightly points out, the broad interpretation of rationality proposed by the supporters of the theory under consideration leads to the blurring of this concept. More fruitful for solving the problems posed by the representatives of rational choice theory would be to single out types of political behavior depending on its motivation. In particular, “social-oriented” behavior in the interests of “social solidarity” differs significantly from rational and selfish behavior.

In addition, rational choice theory is often criticized for some technical inconsistencies arising from the main provisions, as well as for the limited explanatory possibilities (for example, the applicability of the model of party competition proposed by its supporters only to countries with a two-party system). However, a significant part of such criticism either stems from a misinterpretation of the work of the representatives of this theory, or is refuted by the representatives of rational choice theory themselves (for example, with the help of the concept of "bounded" rationality).

Despite these shortcomings, rational choice theory has a number of virtues which are the reason for its great popularity. The first undoubted advantage is that standard methods of scientific research are used here. The analyst formulates hypotheses or theorems based on a general theory. The method of analysis used by supporters of rational choice theory proposes the construction of theorems that include alternative hypotheses about the intentions of political actors. The researcher then subjects these hypotheses or theorems to empirical testing. If reality does not disprove theorems, that theorem or hypothesis is considered relevant. If the test results are unsuccessful, the researcher draws the appropriate conclusions and repeats the procedure again. The use of this technique allows the researcher to draw a conclusion about what actions of people, institutional structures and the results of the exchange of activities will be most likely under certain conditions. Thus, rational choice theory solves the problem of verifying theoretical propositions by testing scientists' assumptions about the intentions of political subjects.

As the well-known political scientist K. von Boime rightly notes, the success of rational choice theory in political science can be generally explained by the following reasons:

1. “neopositivist requirements for the use of deductive methods in political science are most easily satisfied with the help of formal models, on which this methodological approach is based

2. The rational choice approach can be applied to the analysis of any type of behavior - from the actions of the most selfish rationalist to the infinitely altruistic activity of Mother Teresa, who maximized the strategy of helping the disadvantaged

3. directions of political science, which are on the middle level between micro- and macrotheories, are forced to recognize the possibility of an approach based on the analysis of activity ( political subjects– E.M., O.T.) actors. The actor in the concept of rational choice is a construction that allows you to avoid the question of the real unity of the individual

4. rational choice theory promotes the use of qualitative and cumulative ( mixed - E.M., O.T.) approaches in political science

5. The rational choice approach acted as a kind of counterbalance to the dominance of behavioral research in previous decades. It is easy to combine it with multi-level analysis (especially when studying the realities of the countries of the European Union) and with ... neo-institutionalism, which became widespread in the 80s.

Rational choice theory has a fairly wide scope. It is used to analyze the behavior of voters, parliamentary activity and coalition formation, international relations, etc., and is widely used in modeling political processes.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the theory of economics. For rational choice theory as applied to forensic science, see rational choice theory (criminology).

Part of a series on
economy

Rational Choice Theory, also known as choice theory or rational action theory, is the basis for understanding and often formally modeling socio-economic behavior. The basic premise of rational choice theory is that aggregate social behavior is the result of the behavior of individual actors, each of which makes its own individual decisions. The theory also focuses on the determinants of individual choice (methodological individualism).

Rational choice theory then assumes that an individual has preferences among the available choices that allow them to specify which option they prefer. These preferences are not considered complete (a person can always say which of the two alternatives they consider preferable or which is preferable to the other) and transitional (if option A is preferable than option B and option B is preferable to option C, then A is preferable than C ). A rational agent is expected to take into account available information, probabilities of events, and potential costs and benefits in determining preferences, and act consistently in choosing a self-determined best course of action.

Rationality is widely used as an assumption about human behavior in microeconomic models and analysis, and appears in almost all economics textbooks of human decision making procedures. It is also used in political science, sociology, and philosophy. A specific variant of rationality is instrumental rationality, which involves finding the most cost-effective means to achieve a particular goal without thinking about the merit of that goal. Gary Becker was an early proponent of applying the actor's rational models more widely. Becker won the 1992 Nobel Prize in Economics for his research on discrimination, crime, and human capital.

Definition and scope

The concept of rationality used in rational choice theory differs from the colloquial and most philosophical use of the word. Colloquially, "rational" behavior usually means "reasonable", "predictable", or "in a thoughtful, sober manner." Rational choice theory uses a narrower definition of rationality. At the most basic level, behavior is rational if it is purposeful, reflective (evaluative), and consistent (during and across choice situations). This contrasts with behavior that is random, impulsive, conditioned or adopted (unevaluative) imitation.

The preference between the two alternatives could be:

• Strict Preference happens when a person prefers more 1 s on the 2 and not not treat them as equally preferred.
• weak preference it follows that the individual either strongly prefers 1 over 2 or indifferent between them.
• Indifference happens when a person prefers on the 1 to in 2 nor 2 to 1 . Since (in fullness) a person is notrefusescomparisons, they must therefore be indifferent in this case.

Research that took off in the 1980s sought to develop models that drop these assumptions and argue that such behavior can still be rational, Anand (1993). This work, often carried out by theoretical economists and analytic philosophers, suggests, in the final analysis, that the assumptions or axioms above are not entirely at all and can perhaps at best be regarded as approximate.

Additional Assumptions

• Perfect Information A: The simple rational choice model above assumes that a person has complete or perfect information about the alternatives, that is, ranking between two options does not involve uncertainty.
• Choice under Uncertainty A: In a richer model that includes uncertainty in how choices (actions) lead to possible outcomes, a person actually chooses between lotteries, where each lottery elicits a different probability distribution over the outcomes. The additional assumption of the independence of extraneous alternatives then leads to expected utility theory.
• Intertemporal Choice: When decisions affect choice (eg consumption) at different points in time, the standard method for evaluating alternatives over time involves discounting the future payoff.
• Limited cognitive ability A: Determining and weighing each alternative against any other can take some time, effort and brain power. Recognizing that these costs impose or cognitively limit individuals leads to the theory of bounded rationality.

Alternative theories of human action include components such as Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman's perspective theory, which reflects the empirical finding that, in contrast to the standard preferences assumed by neoclassical economics, people attach additional value to objects they already have. is compared with similar articles owned by others. According to standard preference, the amount a person is willing to pay for a product (such as a drinking mug) is considered equal to the amount he or she is willing to pay to part with it. In experiments, the latter price is sometimes significantly higher than the former (but see Plott and Zeiler 2005, Plott and Zeiler 2007 and Klass and Zeiler, 2013). Tversky and Kahneman do not characterize loss as irrational aversion. Behavioral economics includes a large number of other changes to his picture of human behavior that go against neoclassical assumptions.

utility maximization

Often preferences are described by their utility features or payoff functions. This is a serial number that a person assigns over available actions, such as:

U (a i) > U (a j) , (\displaystyle U\left(a_(i)\right)>U\left(a_(j)\right).)

the individual's preferences are then expressed as a ratio between these ordinal tasks. For example, if a person prefers candidate Sarah over Roger for abstinence, their preference would be related to:

U (Sarah) > U (Roger) > U (refrain) , (\displaystyle U\left((\text(Sara))\right)>U\left((\text(Roger))\right)>U\ left((\text(refrain))\right).)

The preference relation, which, as stated above, satisfies completeness, transitivity, and, moreover, continuity, can be equivalently represented by a utility function.

criticism

Both assumptions and behavioral predictions of rational choice theory have drawn criticism from various camps. As mentioned above, some economists have developed models of bounded rationality that hope to be more psychologically plausible without completely abandoning the idea that reason underlies decision-making processes. Other economists have developed several theories of human decision making, which allow for the role of uncertainty and the determination of individual tastes according to their socioeconomic conditions (see Fernandez-Huerga, 2008).

Other social scientists, inspired in part by Bourdieu's thinking, have expressed concern about the misuse of economic metaphors in other contexts, suggesting that this may have political implications. The argument they make is that by treating everything as a kind of "economy", they make a particular vision of the way the economy works seems more natural. Thus, they assume, rational choice is as much ideological as it is scientific, which does not in itself negate its scientific usefulness.

The evolutionary psychology perspective is that many of the apparent contradictions and biases regarding rational choice can be explained rationally in the context of maximizing biological fitness in the ancestral environment, but not necessarily in the current one. Thus, when living at the subsistence level, where diminishing resources may have meant death, it may have been rational to place more value on losses than on gains. Proponents argue that this could also explain the differences between the groups.

Benefits

The choice approach allows rational preferences to be represented as real utility functions. The economic decision-making process becomes the problem of maximizing this

The problem of choice is one of the central ones in economics. The two main actors in the economy - the buyer and the producer - are constantly involved in the processes of choice. The consumer decides what to buy and at what price. The producer decides what to invest in, what goods to produce.

One of the basic assumptions of economic theory is that people make rational choices. Rational choice means the assumption that a person's decision is the result of an orderly thought process. The word "orderly" is defined by economists in a strict mathematical form. A number of assumptions about human behavior are introduced, which are called the axioms of rational behavior.

Provided that these axioms are valid, a theorem is proved on the existence of a certain function that establishes human choice - the utility function. usefulness called the value that in the process of choice maximizes a person with rational economic thinking. We can say that utility is an imaginary measure of the psychological and consumer value of various goods.

Decision-making problems with consideration of utilities and probabilities of events were the first ones that attracted the attention of researchers. The formulation of such tasks usually consists in the following: a person chooses some actions in the world where the result (outcome) of the action is influenced by random events beyond the control of a person, but having some knowledge about the probabilities of these events, a person can calculate the most advantageous set and order of his actions. actions.

Note that in this formulation of the problem, options for action are usually not evaluated according to many criteria. Thus, a simpler (simplified) description of them is used. Not one, but several successive actions are considered, which makes it possible to build so-called decision trees (see below).

A person who follows the axioms of rational choice is called in economics rational person.

2. Axioms of rational behavior

Six axioms are introduced and the existence of a utility function is proved. Let us give a meaningful presentation of these axioms. Denote by x, y, z different outcomes (results) of the selection process, and by p, q - the probabilities of certain outcomes. We introduce the definition of a lottery. A lottery is a game with two outcomes: outcome x, obtained with probability p, and outcome y, obtained with probability 1-p (Fig. 2.1).

Fig.2.1. Lottery introduction

An example of a lottery is a coin toss. In this case, as is known, heads or tails fall out with probability p = 0.5. Let x = $10 and

y = - $10 (i.e. we get $10 on heads and pay the same amount on tails). The expected (or average) price of the lottery is determined by the formula px + (1-p) y.

We present the axioms of rational choice.

Axiom 1. Outcomes x, y, z belong to the set A of outcomes.

Axiom 2. Let P mean strong preference (similar to the relation > in mathematics); R - non-strict preference (similar to ratio ³); I - indifference (similar to the relation =). It is clear that R includes P and I. Axiom 2 requires two conditions to be satisfied:

1) connectivity: either xRy or yRx, or both;

2) transitivity: from xRy and yRz follows xRz.

Axiom 3. The two shown in Fig. 2.2 lotteries are in the attitude of indifference.

Rice. 2.2. Two lotteries in a relationship of indifference

The validity of this axiom is obvious. It is written in standard form as ((x, p, y)q, y)I (x, pq, y). Here on the left is a complex lottery, where with probability q we get a simple lottery, in which with probability p we get outcome x or with probability (1-p) - outcome y), and with probability (1-q) - outcome y.

Axiom 4. If xIy, then (x, p, z) I (y, p, z).

Axiom 5. If xPy, then xP(x, p, y)Py.

Axiom 6. If xPyPz, then there is a probability p such that y!(x, p, z).

All the above axioms are quite simple to understand and seem obvious.

Assuming that they are satisfied, the following theorem was proved: if axioms 1-6 are satisfied, then there is a numerical utility function U defined on A (set of outcomes) and such that:

1) xRy if and only if U(x) > U(y).

2) U(x, p, y) = pU(x)+(l-p)U(y).

The function U(x) is unique up to a linear transformation (for example, if U(x) > U(y), then a+U(x) > > a+U(y), where a is a positive integer) .

This paragraph has in its title the phrase social production. Why was this epithet needed Is the concept of production not enough to clarify the need for the interaction of the main factors of production? Even an individual craftsman or farmer, believing that he acts completely independently of anyone else, is in fact connected by thousands of economic threads with other people. It can also be noted here that the Robinsonade method, when an individual person (one of the most widely used research methods in ) living on a desert island, is considered as an example, does not contradict the statement about the social nature of production. Robinsonade helps to better understand the mechanism of rational economic behavior of an individual, but this mechanism does not cease to operate if we move from the Robinson model to the realities of not individual, but public choice. It may seem that only macroeconomics is connected with the study of social production, while microeconomics deals only with individual economic individuals. Indeed, in the study of microeconomics, we will most often have to use the individual producer or consumer as an example. But at the same time, it must be remembered that the mentioned subjects operate in a system of restrictions imposed by public institutions (for example, the institution of property, morality, and other formal and informal rules).

The rational use of limited economic resources in order to most fully meet the needs of the individual, households, and other economic entities is manifested primarily in, which should be considered the identical theory of the equilibrium of the individual and the household in consumption. It explores such conditions and rules of consumer behavior in a market economy that ensure the achievement of the main goal - increasing their level of well-being in the face of growing needs. The conclusions and provisions of the theory of consumer choice allow answering questions related to the rationalization of the use of income by an individual and a household, as well as other limited resources. In modern economic theory, there are two approaches to identifying the patterns of economic behavior of a person who seeks to maximize the parameters of his consumption and, consequently, well-being.

The second, institutional approach to the problem of consumer choice, on the one hand, concretizes neoclassical "idealism", and on the other hand, introduces qualitatively new approaches to the study of the economic behavior of individuals. In general, abstract-logical constructions are being replaced by no less complex, but more realistic postulates and justifications for the rational behavior of consumers. The institutional approach to the problem of consumer choice is formed from the concepts of the "old" in-

We paid more attention to the economic way of thinking. In Chapter 1, we significantly expanded the section on the economic approach to reality, dealing in detail with the problems of scarcity of resources and choice, rational behavior, and marginal analysis. In Chapter 2, we use the concepts of marginal benefit and marginal cost (see Figure 2-2) to determine the optimum position for an economy on the production possibilities curve. And later, in the rest of the textbook, we do not miss the opportunity to recall the economic approach.

Let us now return to the problem of making decisions that allow individuals acting as consumers, within the limits of their income, to choose the most preferable set of goods and services for themselves. From an economic point of view, consumer behavior is rational if the option chosen by him allows him to get maximum satisfaction from the purchased set of goods and services. On the basis of the hypothesis about the rationality of consumer behavior, the theory of consumer choice is constructed.

The fundamental premise of economic man is that all people know the alternatives available in a given situation and all the consequences that they will cause. It also assumes that people will behave rationally, that is, they will make choices that maximize some value. Even today, most microeconomic theories are based on the assumption of profit maximization. Obviously, it is wrong to assume that people always behave in a rational way. G. Simon believed that an administrative person is a more accurate model of reality, since managers were never fully informed and were rarely able to maximize anything. Due to the physical limitations of decision makers, Simon introduced the principle of bounded rationality. Since optimization looks too difficult for an administrative person, Simon suggested that satisfaction is a more realistic and typical procedure. The satisfaction seeker considers possible alternatives until he finds one that meets the minimum standard of satisfaction. Although many new quantitative methods give managers a better understanding of the situation in which the decision is made, studies of real decision-making behavior have reinforced this theory.

IGOR. And when it comes to redistribution, it is necessary to find a balance between the interests of those who receive and those who give. This means that the logic of the behavior of the state is the logic of public choice, which, unlike the individual, is made jointly, moreover, with the help of political institutions. Economic theory studies social choice from its own specific point of view, considering it as the result of the actions of rational individuals. Of course, economic analysis primarily emphasizes the similarities and

Finally, it should be said about approaches to studying the behavior of voters. In terms of the rational choice model, voters will vote only if the expected benefits outweigh the expected costs. The size of the expected benefits is multiplied by the product of the welfare gain that the voter will receive as a result of the victory of the party announcing the most favorable course of economic policy for him, by the probability that it is the vote of this voter that will have a decisive influence on the outcome of the election (an additional factor can be the voter's subjective assessment of the probability that that the party will keep its campaign promises). Since the probability of casting a decisive vote in most cases is not

He concluded his Nobel lecture with these words. I am impressed by how many economists are showing a desire to study social issues, rather than those that traditionally formed the core of economics. At the same time, the economic mode of modeling behavior often attracts, with its analytical power, which the principle of individual rationality provides it, specialists from other fields who study social problems. Influential schools of rational choice theorists and empiricists are active in sociology, jurisprudence, political science, history, anthropology, and psychology. The rational choice model provides the most promising

Among the numerous models of human behavior in the modern economy, there are several of the most well-known and genetically related. First of all, this is the model of behavior of the "economic man", according to which each individual, having the freedom of economic choice, seeks to satisfy individual needs through rational behavior. This model was created by the classical and neoclassical school of economics and dominated until the middle of the 20th century. The essence of this model lies in the desire of each person, who freely disposes of his resources, to achieve the maximum possible benefit from their use. The subjective basis of this model is a person as an individual, and the object structure of the created and consumed goods is represented mainly by material and material products of labor activity.

Within the framework of the "economic man" behavior model, one can single out the neoclassical concept of shelf or absolute rationality, as well as the neo-institutional concept of limited or satisfactory rationality. The essence of the concept of absolute rationality lies in the fact that an individual consciously striving for the best economic choice receives the highest positive economic income from all possible alternatives. This is achieved through the competent use of information that is directly and indirectly related to the solution of economic problems. The disadvantage of the concept of complete rationality is the excessive abstraction and abstraction of researchers from socio-economic realities.

In addition, the desire of an individual to make the best economic choice and the related search and processing of the necessary information are always carried out in a certain institutional environment, under the conditions of formal and informal norms and rules. An individual striving to rationalize his economic activity is in a system of socio-economic and other relationships with other individuals. It is in their common interests to streamline, i.e., institutionalize the system of relations with each other, which is impossible without "permissions" and "prohibitions" accepted and observed by all for quite definite decisions and actions. Thus, such behavior of an "economic man" becomes rational, which is associated with the search not for the theoretically best, but practically the most preferable, or satisfactory, option for an economic choice.

The subjectivist approach to the study of economic relations analyzes the behavior of a particular individual, and not an economic entity as such, which can be a firm, a state, etc. theory is reduced to a description of human activity, determined by the boundaries of individual needs. The model of human behavior in the economy is identified here with the model of behavior of "economic man", and the main concepts are "needs", "utility", "economic choice", etc. The economic theory itself is identified here with theories of rational human behavior when using limited resources.

The fourth feature concerns the calculation of results, consequences - the effectiveness of behavior. Activities are judged on their effectiveness, i.e. by result. In this sense, the goal of an activity is its result. Decision-making refers to the evaluation of alternatives, the calculation of consequences, the choice of a course of action based on the relative value of the expected result. It is assumed that both the means and the ends themselves are chosen in this way. If the achievement of the goal requires too much risk and / or cost, then, as economists believe, the economic person is called from the goal. Therefore, the rationality of economic behavior is understood as a calculation (of goals, means, results) and a sequence of these steps.

The problem of choice in its neoclassical version can be looked at in two ways. So, from the point of view of limited resources, it looks like an optimization of the behavior of an economic agent. On the other hand, choice is an attribute of a free individual, free at least from personal dependence. Being one of the initial premises of classical and neoclassical economic theory, the problem of choice has undergone a bifurcation, its sides began to exist separately. This was the basis for the emergence of two different research trends, based on different foundations, one on the premise of freedom of choice, the other on the premise of rational choice, although both tendencies can formally preserve both of them. In economic theory itself, what is now formed is what is called orthodox or general economic theory, the "mainstream", in the methodological core of which one of the main places is given to the principle of rationality of individual choice, which was subsequently criticized by neo-institutionalists and representatives of the new institutional economics.

The founders of the institutional school (T.Veblen, J.Commons, J.M.Clark, W.Mitchel, W.Hamilton, etc.) considered institutions as models and norms of behavior, as well as habits of thinking that influence the choice of strategies for economic behavior in addition to the motivation of rational economic choice. Unlike the old institutionalists, supporters of the neo-institutional direction O. Williamson, R. Coase, D. North and others give the concept of an institution a broader meaning, considering them as the most important factors in economic interactions and, accordingly, building a system of other categories on this concept. We join the interpretation according to which institutions are the rules of the game in society, or, more formally, man-made restrictive frameworks that organize relationships between people. Therefore, they set the structure of the motives for human interaction - be it in politics,

test

Rational economic choice

A major role in the conditions of limited resources is played by the choice of the consumer between the options for using resources. The optimal economic choice depends on the costs and the result obtained.

There are three main actors in the economy: consumer, producer and society. In conditions of limited resources, the consumer must measure his income with expenses. The manufacturer decides what to produce, in what quantity, also commensurate all costs and revenues. This is how a rational economic choice is formed. That is, with a minimum of costs, a maximum result is achieved.

According to the cost of the good, which can be very different, the consumer decides what it will be profitable for him to purchase. And if he chooses one or another product at a favorable price, knowing that it will bring a good result, then we can talk about a rational (optimal) economic choice. Therefore, it is associated with the assessment of the opportunity cost of a good.

Information support for decision-making in the management of the Federal Property Management Agency

To date, a wide range of DBMS is represented on the software market, among them there are DBMS that allow you to implement the basic functions necessary for a simple application that does not impose increased requirements on the functionality...

Organizational and economic calculation of the office of an otorhinolaryngologist

The cabinet is equipped with equipment in accordance with the equipment standard in accordance with Appendix No. 3 of the order of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation dated 12.11.2012. N 905n "Standard for equipping an otorhinolaryngological office"...

Organization of continental lunch service in the restaurant of the Mir Hotel (Kharkiv) for a group of tourists from Germany

When choosing a banquet hall, it is necessary to take into account: · capacity of the hall; Compliance of the interior with the nature of your celebration; quality of service and variety of menus; design, embellishments...

Valuation of JSC "Gazprom" gas distribution Chelyabinsk

The comparative approach uses two types of information: stock market information about the selling prices of shares (Russian Trading System, MICEX, etc.)...

consumer behavior

Consumers make a rational (optimal) choice in the market, i.e. choose goods so as to achieve the maximum satisfaction of their needs with a given limited budget ...

The subject of economic theory

There are different ways to use resources and different goals that are achieved when using them. There is also the possibility of moving resources from one application to another. Assuming that the amount of resources (labor...

Entrepreneur as a subject of the economic process

The quality of a person's life is largely determined by how fully he manages to satisfy his material and spiritual needs. A person cannot not satisfy his needs, because he, one might say ...

Development of a business plan for CJSC "Germes"

Self-regulation (SRO) in the field of construction, reconstruction, overhaul of capital construction facilities (construction activities) (SRO) ...

Development of a business plan for an enterprise for the production of soft toys

The working capital of an enterprise is financial resources invested in current assets (raw materials, materials, fuel, energy, etc.) ...

Calculation of technical and economic indicators of the enterprise "Optics"

Table 9. Selection of the main equipment No. p./p Name of equipment Type, model, brand Purpose Productivity, Lenses / hour Unit cost, thousand rubles. Quantity Total cost, thousand rubles...

Improving the methodology for the formation of an insurance stock at industrial enterprises

Traditionally, stocks are divided into transport, preparatory, technological, current, seasonal and insurance (Buffer stock -- BS). The components of all stocks (with the exception of insurance and seasonal stocks) are calculated as follows...

Creation of an online store of chocolate sweets

Our potential buyers are residents of Moscow and the Moscow region. Our segment in the market - people of the middle strata of society, living as in the city ...

consumer choice theory

The behavior of the consumer in the market, especially when buying expensive goods (for example, real estate) is associated with a situation that can be called uncertainty. The consumer is at some risk...

Characteristics of the economic and commercial activities of the enterprise "Vesna"

The importance of choosing a supplier is explained not only by the functioning of a large number of suppliers of the same material resources on the modern market, but also by the fact that it should be, first of all, ...

Pricing policy of the organization

The pricing policy and strategy should be consistent with the specific marketing strategy of the organization. The purpose of such a strategy may be: 1) penetration into a new market; 2) product market development...