11月荐书

新经典

《承诺的策略》

（美）托马斯谢林著，王永钦 薛峰译，上海人民出版社，2009年7月第一版

　　讲行为经济学，许多教授必讲“谢林社会仿真模型”。2005年，谢林获得诺贝尔奖，几乎同时，他的一个文集也有了中译本，不过，那里没有收录他这篇社会仿真模型的论文。在“序言”里，谢林介绍，这是一部“新书”，反映了他“最早的两大研究兴趣”，其核心是“合作”，或者，“人类合作的秩序问题”。

　　“社会”何以可能？谢林的解答是，为了使合作成为可能，种群内的个体之间必须有“承诺”——关于合作行为的承诺和关于惩罚背叛行为的承诺。有效的承诺，要求个体放弃一部分自由和机会。

　　另一方面，许多个体的相互承诺，未必导致合作的社会。前者是微观行为，后者是宏观秩序。从微观行为到宏观秩序，谢林尝试的一种方法，今天称为“社会仿真”，是各种借助于计算机程序的多主体仿真模型。通过这些仿真计算，我们知道，在无数可想像和可编程的微观行为规则当中，只有非常宝贵的少数，可导致宏观的合作秩序。

《自由与文明》

（英）布劳尼斯娄马林诺夫斯基著，张帆译，世界图书出版公司，2009年10月第一版

　　作者是伟大的人类学家、费孝通的导师，却少有人知道，他曾写了这样一本关于政治的小册子。据中译者在篇幅足以引发读者注意的“译后记”里介绍，这是作者生前著的最后一本书，在编完这本书的五个星期里，他去世了。

　　这里，中译者对作者的意图有这样的概括：“……马林诺夫斯基用于判断自由：判断一个人是否自由，要看他是否能够以合法的文化手段来满足需求；判断一个文化是否自由，要看这个文化是否能够提供选择的可能性、实现所选目标的手段的多样性以及目标实现后获取劳动成果的公平性。……如何能够实现公平分配，这是保证自由最重要的一环，有的人劳而无获，有的人不劳而获，这都不是自由，因此，分配过程需要制度保障。”

《共和的理念》

（意）诺伯特博比奥、莫里奇奥维罗里著，杨立峰译，吉林出版集团，2009年7月第一版

　　只要阅读第一章，读者就会被那段对话吸引：美德，其实是自由的基础。因此，每一名公民，只要他希望生活在自由的共和国里，就应当具备最基本的美德。这是公民正常政治生活的道德基础。“共和，是一种建基于其公民的美德和爱国主义之上的理想国家形式。”

　　推荐本书，旨在构成某种与当前中国政治格局及其走势密切相关的阅读氛围。

知识与情趣

《亚当斯密》

（英）加文肯尼迪著，苏军译，华夏出版社，2009年7月第一版

　　这本书的英文版2008年面世，它的英语广告这样写着：本书描述了真实可信的斯密，探究了斯密基础的思路和激进的思考，意在重构斯密的原本意向。斯密的激进思考，至少包括他在《道德情操论》1789年最后版本提供给读者的解释：“我曾在本书第一版的最后一段说过，我要在另一本书中努力说明法律和政府的基本原则……”

　　为什么斯密不继续完成“法学手稿”？在这本书的第五章，读者可以找到答案。

《进步简史》

（加）隆纳莱特著，达娃译，海南出版社，2009年9月第一版

　　古罗马诗人奥维德（Ovid）在2000年前就曾预言：“聪明的天性，使人成为自身发明的受害者；灾难性的创造力，你为何要以高耸的围墙包围城市？”反观人类进步历史，其实就是各种文明试验的历史，同时也是人类一再重蹈“进步陷阱”的历史。在文明发展至巅峰时，对生态的索求也达到顶点，为了追求持续的成长繁荣，只好抢劫未来，以支付眼前的开销，最后将大自然的赐予洗劫一空，然后随着生态环境的崩毁而瓦解。

　　“文明若要存续，必须依赖自然资本产生的利息，如果无节制地糟蹋本金，必将遭受文明的反噬。”这是作者开篇就提醒我们注意的。不得不承认，我们现在，也正处于“一日千里”的文明进步中，而对自然的掠夺也超过了以往任何时期。在这场坚持“经济没有极限”的游戏中，过去的输家是穷人，而如今输掉的，却会是整个地球。

　　本刊研究部

In a departure from prevailing economic theory, the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science was awarded Monday to two social scientists for their work in demonstrating that business people — co-workers as well as competitors — often find ways to mutually resolve problems that arise from free-market competition.

The prize committee cited Elinor Ostrom of Indiana University “for her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons,” and Oliver E. Williamson of the University of California, Berkeley, “for his analysis of economic governance, especially the boundaries of the firm.”

Ms. Ostrom becomes the first woman to win the prize for economics. Her background is in political science, not economics.

“It is part of the merging of the social sciences,” Robert Shiller, an economist at Yale, said of Monday’s awards. “Economics has been too isolated and these awards today are a sign of the greater enlightenment going around. We were too stuck on efficient markets and it was derailing our thinking.”

The prize committee, in making the awards, seemed to be influenced by the credit crisis and the severe recession that in the minds of many mainstream economists has highlighted the shortcomings of a unregulated marketplace, in which “economic actors,” left to their own devices, will act in their own self-interests and in doing so, will enhance everyone’s well-being.

The committee, in effect, said that theory was too simplistic and ignored the unstated relationships and behaviors that develop among companies that are competitors but find ways to resolve common problems. “Both scholars have greatly enhanced our understanding of non-market institutions” other than government, the committee said.

“Basically there is a common understanding that develops even among competitors when they are dealing with each other,” Mr. Shiller said, adding “when people make business contact, even competitors, they can’t anticipate everything, so an element of trust comes in.”

That is what the Nobel committee recognized, he said, in citing Mr. Williamson and Ms. Ostrom.

In its announcement, the committee said Ms. Ostrom “has challenged the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized. Based on numerous studies of user-managed fish stocks, pastures, woods, lakes, and groundwater basins, Ostrom concludes that the outcomes are, more often than not, better than predicted by standard theories.”

Mr. Williamson’s research, the committee said, found that “when market competition is limited, firms are better suited for conflict resolution than markets.”

Ms. Ostrom, 76, was born in Los Angeles, and received her Ph.D. in political science in 1965 from the University of California, Los Angeles. She is the Arthur F. Bentley professor of political science at Indiana University, Bloomington. She is also co-director of the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis. Mr. Williamson, 77, was born in Superior, Wis., and received his Ph.D. in economics in 1963 from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. He is the Edgar F. Kaiser professor emeritus of business, economics and law and a professor at the graduate school of business at the University of California, Berkeley.

The economics prize was created in 1969 by the Swedish central bank in honor of Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite who established the awards for achievements in physics, chemistry, medicine, peace and literature in his will in 1896.

The winners will share 10 million Swedish kronor ($1.4 million), and each receive a gold medal and diploma from the Swedish king on Dec. 10, which is the anniversary of Nobel’s death in 1896.

Last year’s winner was Paul Krugman, a professor at Princeton and an Op-Ed page columnist for The New York Times. Mr. Krugman won the prize for his research that explained patterns of trade among countries, as well as what goods are produced where and why.