Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:23:37.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Entrepreneurship and Government Policy: The Case of the Housing Market*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Mary K. Farmer  and
Ray Barrell
Mary K. Farmer
Affiliation:
Sociology, School of Social Sciences, University of Sussex
Ray Barrell
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Brunel University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article discusses the use made of the ‘Austrian’ concept of entrepreneurship in the present British government's policy discussions, and, using an ‘Austrian’ method of argument, demonstrates that there is a deep-seated inconsistency in its policies which suggests that it, along with the administrations of a number of other western democracies including the United States, has not fully understood the implications of the doctrines to which it appears to have committed itself. This inconsistency relates to its continued support for the existing structure of subsidies in the UK housing market which, it is argued, have made private home-buying so profitable an activity for entrepreneurial individuals as to substantially reduce the attractiveness of the option of setting up new businesses. Whether or not the government is right to believe that, in an economic environment with greater incentives, there would be a great expansion in individual entrepreneurial effort in ‘productive’ activities, this is not likely to happen whilst, amongst other things, the structure of housing subsidies remains substantially unchanged. We suggest, in the light of comparative international evidence, that a better alternative is available.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , August 1981 , pp. 307 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alchian, A. (1950) Uncertainty, evolution and economic theory, Journal of Political Economy, 58, 211–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannock, G. (1981) The Economics of Smalt Firms. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coddington, A. (1975) Creaking semaphore and beyond: a consideration of Shackle's ‘Epistemics and economies’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 26, 151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cmnd 4811 (1971) Report of Committee of Inquiry on Small Firms (The Bolton Report). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Cmnd 7503 (1979) The Financing of Small Firms (The Wilson Committee Interim Report). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Dolan, E. (ed.) (1976) The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics. Kansas: Sheed and Ward.Google Scholar
Downs, A. (1980). Too much capital for housing?, Brookings Bulletin 17 (1), 1–5.Google Scholar
Housing Policy Review, Technical Volume II (1977). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Kay, J. and King, M. (1978) The British Tax System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kirzner, I. (1973) Competition and Entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
von Mises, L. (1949) Human Action. London: Hodge.Google Scholar
von Mises, L. (1978) The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science. Sheed, Andrews and McMeel.Google Scholar
Pawley, M. (1978) Home Ownership. London: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, R. (1978) Economic Journal, 88, 182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, J. (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (1976) The Wealth of Nations (ed. Cannan, Edwin). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Spadaro, L. (ed.) (1978) New Directions in Austrian Economics. Sheed, Andrews and McMeel.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. (1979) Debate on the Queen's Speech, House of Commons Debates, 1138.Google Scholar