There is a growing consensus in social sciences that there is a need for interdisciplinary research on the complexity of human behavior. At an age of crisis for both the economy and economic theory, economics is called upon to fruitfully cooperate with contiguous social disciplines. The term ‘economics imperialism’ refers to the expansion of economics to territories that lie outside the traditional domain of the discipline. Its critics argue that in starting with the assumption of maximizing behaviour, economics excludes the nuances of rival disciplines and has problems in interpreting real-world phenomena. This book focuses on a territory that persists to be largely intractable using the postulates of economics: that of primitive societies. In retracing the origins of economics imperialism back to the birth of the discipline, this volume argues that it offers a reductionist interpretation that is poor in interpretative power. By engaging with the neglected traditions of sociological and anthropological studies, the analysis offers suggestions for a more democratic cooperation between the social sciences. Economics as Social Science is of great interest to those who study history of economic thought, political economy and the history of economic anthropology, as well as history of social sciences and economic methodology.

In Economics Imperialism and Interdisciplinarity: The Watershed and After, Ben Fine selects and adds to his key articles tracking economics imperialism through three phases, focusing on the last decade of the third phase – anything goes as with freakonomics. Each article is accompanied by a preamble setting the context in which it appeared, with a new overall introduction and literature survey drawing out the overall significance for contemporary scholarship. Ranging over mainstream and heterodox economics, the disputes between them, the relationship between economics and other disciplines, and authors such as Lazear, Stiglitz and Akerlof, the accelerating presence of economics imperialism is documented alongside its perverse, critical neglect. The volume is imperative for those engaging in political economy across the social sciences.

The growing body of research on interdisciplinarity has encouraged a more in depth analysis of the relations that hold among academic disciplines. In particular, the incursion of one scientific discipline into another discipline’s traditional domain, also known as scientific imperialism, has been a matter of increasing debate. Following this trend, Scientific Imperialism aims to bring together philosophers of science and historians of science interested in the topic of scientific imperialism and, in particular, interested in the conceptual clarification, empirical identification, and normative assessment of the idea of scientific imperialism. Thus, this innovative volume has two main goals. Indeed, the authors first seek to understand interdisciplinary relations emerging from the incursion of one scientific discipline into one or more other disciplines, such as in cases in which the conventions and procedures of one discipline or field are imposed on other fields; or more weakly when a scientific discipline seeks to explain phenomena that are traditionally considered proper of another discipline’s domain. Secondly, the authors explore ways of distinguishing imperialistic from non-imperialistic interactions between disciplines and research fields. The first sustained study of scientific imperialism, this volume will appeal to postgraduate students and postdoctoral researchers interested in fields such as Science and Technology Studies, Sociology of Science & Technology, Philosophy of Science, and History of Science.

In Economics Imperialism and Interdisciplinarity: Before the Watershed, Ben Fine offers a selection of his key articles charting the rise of economics imperialism. Each article is accompanied by a preamble that sets the context in which it appeared, with an overall introduction drawing out the overall significance for contemporary scholarship. Ranging over mainstream and heterodox economics, the disputes between them, the relationship between economics and other disciplines, and thinkers as diverse as Kuhn, Becker and Bourdieu, the collection offers a unique and compelling account of how mainstream economics has both changed dramatically whilst its core and narrow principles have remained as sacrosanct as they are invalid. The volume is imperative for those engaging in political economy across the social sciences.

Economists have not always been on friendly terms with scientists from other fields. More than once, economists have been accused of 'imperialism' or criticized for neglecting the insights obtained in other fields. The history of economics, however, yields manifold examples of interdisciplinary 'borrowing' where economists have adapted concepts and

In Economics Imperialism and Interdisciplinarity: Before the Watershed, visionary economist Ben Fine offers a selection of his key articles charting the rise of economics imperialism. Each article is accompanied by a preamble that sets the context in which it appeared, providing an overall introduction that draws out the lasting significance for contemporary scholarship. Ranging over mainstream and heterodox economics, the disputes between them, the relationship between economics and other disciplines, and thinkers as diverse as Kuhn, Becker and Bourdieu, the collection offers a unique and compelling account of how mainstream economics has both changed dramatically while its core and narrow principles have remained as sacrosanct as they are invalid. Economics Imperialism is imperative for those engaging in political economy across the social sciences.

Historians have so far made few attempts to assess directly the costs and benefits of Britain's investment in empire. This book presents answers to some of the key questions about the economics of imperialism: how large was the flow of finance to the empire? How great were the profits on empire investment? What were the social costs of maintaining the empire? Who received the profits, and who bore the costs? The authors show that colonial finance did not dominate British capital markets; returns from empire investment were not high in comparison to earnings in the domestic and foreign sectors; there is no evidence of continued exploitative profits; and empire profits were earned at a substantial cost to the taxpayer. They depict British imperialism as a mechanism to effect an income transfer from the tax-paying middle class to the elites in which the ownership of imperial enterprise was heavily concentrated, with some slight net transfer to the colonies in the process.

In Economics Imperialism and Interdisciplinarity: The Watershed and After, visionary economist Ben Fine selects and adds to his key articles tracking economics imperialism through three phases, with a special focus on the last decade of the third phase--anything goes as with freakonomics. Each article is accompanied by a preamble that sets the context in which it appeared, providing an overall introduction that draws out the lasting significance for contemporary scholarship. This volume ranges over mainstream and heterodox economics, the disputes between them, the relationship between economics and other disciplines, and discusses authors such as Edward Lazear, Joseph Stiglitz and George Akerlof. Through careful analysis the accelerating presence of economics imperialism is documented alongside its perverse, critical neglect. Economics Imperialism and Interdisciplinarity is imperative for those engaging in political economy across the social sciences.

Law and Economics is an established field of research and arguably one of the few examples of a successful interdisciplinary project. This book explores whether, or to what extent, that interdisciplinarity has indeed been a success. It provides insights on the foundations and methods, achievements and challenges of Law and Economics, at a time when both the continuing criticism of academic economics and the growth of empirical legal studies raise questions about the identity and possible further developments of the project. Through a combination of reflections on long-term trends and detailed case studies, contributors to this volume analyse the institutional and epistemic character of Law and Economics, which develops through an exchange of concepts, models and practices between economics and legal scholarship. Inspired by insights from the philosophy of the social sciences, the book shows how concepts travel between legal scholarship and economics and change meanings when applied elsewhere, how economic theories and models inform, and transform, judicial practice, and it addresses whether the transfers of knowledge between economics and law are symmetrical exchanges between the two disciplines.