The cases, issues, and theoretical convictions of the social science work on the concept `moral economy' are explored to develop a full understanding of what divergent theories and accounts share in common and to gauge the philosophical relevance of moral economy. The work of E.P. Thompson, James Scott, William Booth, Thomas Arnold, and Daniel Little are featured along with contemporary cases of moral economy. Conceptual clarification is guided by the categorization of common qualities including the scope of application, whether it is used historically or normatively, relevant time frame, nature of the community, goals that motivate practitioners, and how people are epistemically situated in relation to the moral economy under consideration. Moral economy is identified here as a community centered response, arising from a sense of common good, reinforced by custom or tradition, to an unjust appropriation or abuse of land, labor, human dignity, natural resources, or material goods; moreover, it is the regular behaviors producing social arrangements that promote just relations between unequal persons or groups within a community to achieve long-term social sustainability. I argue that the moral economists are right to insist that people regularly make collective claims and take action on behalf of their communities for reasons that are not primarily self-interested. Furthermore, I demonstrate that social ethics and political behavior are culturally and temporally contextual, i.e. non-ideal. Moral economy must be understood as economic through behaviors and relationships of exchange not limited to the market or following (neo)classical economics. Importantly, moral economy recognizes that this system of exchange is embedded within the larger society. Building upon that, I maintain that all communities are embedded to some degree, so moral economy is not limited to peasant contexts or historical periods. It is not an ethical theory, but a system of practice. Moral economy is guided by a commitment to the ethos of the common good. The debate between moral economy and political economy is laid out and special attention is given to the disagreements between their two most identifiable figures, James C. Scott and Samuel L. Popkin. While moral economy and political economy may have originated from the same general considerations regarding the political and economic influence on individuals and society, they have taken distinctly different trajectories. Later moral economy is compared with several political philosophies including Liberalism, Socialism, and Anarchism. While moral economy may have more in common with Anarchism and Socialism, I contend it is more compatible in practice with Liberalism.
Read
