Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis

Editor-in-Chief: Ewing, Bradley T. / Hoffman, Jim


CiteScore 2017: 0.32

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.160
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.622

Online
ISSN
1932-9156
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Austrian Economics, Market Process, and the EVA® Framework

Nicolás CachanoskyORCID iD: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9685-0899
Published Online: 2017-01-18 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbvela-2016-0014

Abstract:

In this paper I present a financial framework, known as Economic Value Added or EVA®, used to value firms and apply it to topics highlighted in the Austrian literature. In particular I contrast the market process emphasis in the Austrian literature with the neoclassical firm profit maximization and the role of Kirzner’s entrepreneurial alertness. Then I show how these micro topics can be aggregated into macro issues such as the Cantillon Effect, an aggregate average period of production, and the impact of country risk into value creation.

Keywords: market process; economic value added; EVA®; financial economics; microfoundations

JEL Classification: E52; E58; F31

Comments welcome!

Prepared for the Free Market Institute’s symposium on Austrian Perspectives on Business Valuation for the Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis

References

  • Baumol, William J. 2003. “On austrian analysis of entrepreneurship and my own.” Austrian Economics and Entrepreneurial Studies 6 : 57–66. DOI:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baumol, William J. 2003. On austrian analysis of entrepreneurship and my own. Advances in Austrian Economics :57–66. 6:57–66. DOI: 10.1016/S1529-2134(03)06004-6.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Boettke, Peter J. 2014. Entrepreneurship, and the entrepreneurial market process: Israel M. Kirzner and the two levels of analysis in spontaneous order studies. The Review of Austrian Economics :233–247. DOI:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Braun, Eduard, Peter Lewin, and Nicolás Cachanosky. 2016. Ludwig von Mises’s approach to capital as a bridge between Austrian and institutional economics. Journal of Institutional Economics: 847–866., http://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137416000102. DOI:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cachanosky, N, and P Lewin. 2014. “Roundaboutness is not a mysterious concept: A financial application to capital theory.” Review of Political Economy 26 (4): 648–665, http://doi.org/10.1080/09538259.2014.957475.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cachanosky, Nicolás, and Peter Lewin. 2016a. An empirical application of the EVA® framework to business cycles. Review of Financial Economics :60–67., DOI:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cachanosky, Nicolás, and Peter Lewin. 2016b. Financial Foundations of Austrian Business Cycle Theory. Advances in Austrian Economics 20:15–44. 20:15–44. DOI:.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, A. J. 2008. “The mythology of capital or of static equilibrium? The böhm-bawerk/clark controversy.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 30 (2): 151–171, http://doi.org/10.1017/S1042771608000161.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, A. J. 2010. “Capital controversy from bhohm-bawerk to bliss: Badly posed or very deep questions? Or what “we” can learn from capital controversy even if you don’t care who won.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 32 (1): 1–21, http://doi.org/10.1017/S105383720999040X.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cohen, A. J, and G. C Harcourt. 2003. “Whatever happened to the cambridge capital theory controversies? preliminaries : Joan robinson’s complaints.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 17 (1): 199–214.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dorfman, R. 1959. “Waiting and the period of production.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 73 (3): 351–372.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ehrbar, A. 1998. EVA:The real key to creating wealth. Hoboken: Wiley Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Garrison, R. W. 2001. Time and money. the macroeconomics of capital structure, edited by M. J Rizzo, and L. H White, 2002. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Hayek, F. A. 1931. Prices and production, 1967. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.Google Scholar

  • Hendrickson, J. R, and A. W Salter. 2015. “Money, liquidity, and the structure of production.” In SSRN electronic journal. DOI:.Crossref

  • Hicks, J. 1939. Value and capital, 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Higgs, R. 2006. Depression, war, and cold war: Challengin the myth of conflict and prosperity. Oakland: The Independent Institute.Google Scholar

  • Hodgson, G. M. 2014. “What is capital? economists and sociologists have changed its meaning: Should it be changed back?” Cambridge Journal of Economics 38 (5): 1063–1086, http://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beu013.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Horwitz, S. G. 2010. “Kirznerian entrepreneurship as a misesian solution to a hayekian problem.” The Journal of Private Enterprise 25 (2): 97–103.Google Scholar

  • Kirzner, I. M. 1973. Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Kirzner, I. M. 2000. The Driving Force of the Market. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Koller, T, M Goedhart, and D Wessels. 1990. Valuation:Measuring and managing the value of companies, 2010. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar

  • Lewin, P. 1999. Capital in disequilibrium, 2011th. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar

  • Lewin, P, and N Cachanosky. 2014. “The average period of production: The history of an idea.” In SSRN electronic journal.

  • Lewin, P, and N Cachanosky. 2015. “What is capital? (again) contributions from finance and economics.” In SSRN electronic journal, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2613469.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Machlup, F. 1935. “Professor knight and the period of production.” The Journal of Political Economy 43 (5): 577–624.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mises, L. von. 1949. Human action, 1996th Irvington-on-Hudson: The Foundation for Economic Education.Google Scholar

  • Osborne, M. 2005. “On the computation of a formula for the duration of a bond that yields precise results.” Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 45 (1): 161–183.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Osborne, M. 2014. Multiple interest rate analysis Houndsmill and Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar

  • Powell, B. 2010. “Some implications of capital heterogeneity.” In Handbook on contemporary austrian economics, edited by P. J Boettke, 124–135. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

  • Powell, B. W, and G Macera. n.d. “Economic calculation and the productivity of investment.” Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis.Google Scholar

  • Rappaport, A. 1986. La creación de valor para el accionista, edited by L Corrons, 1998th. Bilbao: Ediciones Deusto S.A.Google Scholar

  • Stern, J. M, J. S Shiely, and I Ross. 2003. The EVA challenge. Wiley: New York.Google Scholar

  • Young, D. S, and S. E O’Byrne. 2000. EVA and value-based management. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2017-01-18


Citation Information: Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis, Volume 12, Issue s1, 20160014, ISSN (Online) 1932-9156, ISSN (Print) 2194-5861, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbvela-2016-0014.

Export Citation

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Peter Lewin and Nicolás Cachanosky
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2018

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in