Competition and competitive environment from the view of the Austrian school

A deep multifaceted study of the modern industry market's competitive environment is impossible to imagine without analyzing its qualitative and quantitative parameters, which represent a single integrated whole. When forming its own methodological approach to the decomposition of the market's competitive environment, each researcher faces the need to choose a relevant toolkit that meets the challenges of its current state. Usually, the works of modern authors, who are the followers of the institutional approach, are devoted to the analysis of the markets' competitive environment. Their works pay attention to the institutional structure of the competitive environment, as well as to the quantitative parameters of market agents' functioning. Nevertheless, in order to analyze the evolution of the competitive environment it is necessary to understand its previous states, as well as the scientific categorical apparatus through the prism of which the predecessors looked at it due to the modern socio-economic processes taking place at that time, as well as the discussion that took place in economic science in this or that period. The aim of the research is to analyze and compare the concepts of competition of representatives of the Austrian school. The object of the study is the theoretical concept of competition and competitive environment. The subject of the study is the evolution of the interpretation of these categories by the representatives of the Austrian school. The gap in the detailed understanding of the presence or absence of a coherent concept of competitive environment in some areas of economic science prompted us to turn to the works of representatives of the Austrian school in order to form a clear understanding of their vision of the competitive forces and the definition of the market competitive environment. Our research allowed systematizing and classifying the disparate opinions of the school's representatives into a single concept, which, in our opinion, opens up prospects for further research.

1. Böhm-Bawerk E. (2010). Capital and interest; Vol. II. Positive Theory of Capital; Vol. III. Further Essays on Capital and Interest. Transl. from English by V. Koshkin, ed. by A. V. Kuryaev. Cheljabinsk: Socium, 916 p. (in Russian).

2. Kirzner I. (2001). Competition and entrepreneurship. Transl. from English, ed. by Prof. A. N. Romanov. Moscow, UNITI–DANA, 239 p. (in Russian).

3. Kleiner G. B. (2023). The expanding universe of economic theory. Altereconomics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–8 (in Russian).

4. Polterovich, V.M. (1998). The crisis of economic theory. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 1, pp. 46–66 (in Russian).

5. Tambovtsev V. L. (2003). Economic theory: crisis or renewal. Terra Economicus, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 24–27 (in Russian).

6. Hayek F. (2009). The meaning of competition. Modern Competition, no. 3, pp. 18–27 (in Russian).

7. Andriychuk O. (2017). The normative foundations of European competition law: assessing the goals of antitrust through the lens of legal philosophy. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 360 p. DOI: 10.4337/9781786436078

8. Backhouse R.E. (2008). Marginal Revolution. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. London, Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_2237–1

9. Cournot A. (1897). Researches into the mathematical principles of the theory of wealth. New York, The Macmillan Company, 235 p.

10. Eücken W. (1992). Foundations of economics: history and theory in the analysis of economic reality. Berlin, Springer, 358 p.

11. Faccarello G., Kurz H. (eds.) (2016) Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume I. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing, 816 p. DOI: 10.4337/9781785366642.

12. Fritz R., Goldschmidt N., Störring M. (2023) Contextual liberalism: the ordoliberal approach to private vices and public benefits. Public Choice, no. 195, pp. 301–322.

13. Kay J. (2014). The Map is Not the Territory: An Essay on the State of Economics. Revista de Economia Institucional, vol. 16, no. 30, pp. 13–24.

14. Kirzner I.M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 60–85.

15. Kurz H.D. (2016). Adam Smith on markets, competition and violations of natural liberty. Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 615–638.

16. Louzek M. (2011). The Battle of Methods in Economics: The Classical Methodenstreit –Menger vs. Schmoller. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 70(2), 439–463.

17. Lucas R. (2009). In Defence of the Dismal Science. The Economist. August 8th. URL: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2009/08/06/in-defence-of-the-dismal-science

18. Menger C. (1985). Investigations into the method of the social sciences, with special reference to economics. New York, London, New York University Press. 262 p.

19. Menger C. (2007). Principles of Economics. Auburn, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 328 p.

20. Mill J.S. (1909). Principles of Political Economy with some of their Applications to Social Philosophy. Seventh edition. London, Longmans, Green and Co. 734 p.

21. Mises L. (1998). Human Action. A Treatise on Economics. Auburn, The Ludwig von Mises Institute. 952 p.

22. Ricardo D. (2004). Piero Sraffa (Ed.) The works and correspondence of David Ricardo. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund. 512 p.

23. Schmoller G. (1883). Zur Methodologie der Staats- und Sozialwissenschaften. Leipzig, Duncker & Humblot. 332 p.

24. Smith A. (1981). Campbell, R.H., Skinner, A.S. (eds). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Vol. I and II, vol. II of the Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, 625 p.

25. Snow M.S. (2002). Competition as a discovery procedure. Quart. J. Austrian Econ., vol. 5, pp. 9–23. DOI: 10.1007/s12113-002-1029-0

26. Stigler G.J. (1957). Perfect Competition, Historically Contemplated. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 1–17.

27. Turgot A.R.J. (1790). Reflections on the Formation and Distribution of Wealth. New York, The Macmillan Co. 131 p.

28. White L.H. (1984). The methodology of the Austrian school economists. rev. ed. Auburn, The Ludwig von Mises Institute of Auburn University, 40 p.

29. Wieser F. (1893) Natural Value. London, Macmillan, 215 p.

30. Wieser F. (1927). Social Economics. New York, Adelphi Company, 492 p.

31. Woodford M. (2011). What's Wrong With Economic Models? A Response to John Kay. Institute for New Economic Thinking. URL: https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8MS3QPB

32.