契约理论批判

A Critique of Contract Theory

2016年诺贝尔经济学奖得主哈特和霍姆斯特罗姆在其《契约理论》中分别讨论了代理模型、劳动契约和不完全契约,企图用数学模型和公式来构建他们的理论。但其研究重蹈了恩格斯在《反杜林论》中曾经提到的杜林的错误,模型完全脱离了现实中正常人的行为。如,在代理模型中,他们提出,委托人应在高产出状态下给代理人支付更少;在劳动契约中,他们企图要求,不管工人愿不愿意给资本家干活,都要给资本家带来同样的收入;在不完全契约中,他们安排不履行协议的买者仅仅失去少量订金,就可白白得到协议品及其收益。因此,哈特和霍姆斯特罗姆的契约理论,既不能简单用于指导中国改革实践,更不宜成为马克思主义政治经济学创新发展的来源之一。

The 2016 Nobel laureates in economics,Oliver Hart and Bengt Holmstrom respectively discussed the agent model,labour contract and incomplete contract in their ＂ contract theory＂,attempting to construct their theory with mathematical models and formulas. However,their research repeat the Turin＇s mistake,which had been mentioned by Engels in Anti-Duhring,that is,the model is entirely out of the normal behavior in reality. For instance,in the agent model,they proposed suggestion that in high productivity state client should pay less to agent; in labor contract,they tried to request that,whether workers are willing to work for capitalists or not,they must bring the same income to capitalists; in incomplete contract,they arranged that,buyers who fail to perform the agreement can just pay a small amount of the deposit and receive the contracted commodity and benefits.