SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kamu Ekonomisi ve Kamu Mali Yönetimi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

REASSESSING THE ECONOMICS OF AHI EVRAN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF INSTITUTIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY

AHİ EVRAN İKTİSADININ KURUMSAL POLİTİK EKONOMİ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN YENİDEN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Hüseyin Tezer(BİLECİK ŞEYH EDEBALİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-2376-5984
Pages
419–448
Publication Date
2026-10-28
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that the Ahi system functioned as an inclusive institutional structure that generated trust, reduced transaction costs, strengthened social capital, and expanded economic participation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study re-evaluates Ahi Evran economics from an institutional political economy perspective and examines the theoretical contributions of the Ahi system to contemporary sustainable development debates.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While the existing literature generally approaches Akhism as a historical, cultural, and vocational organization, this study conceptualizes it as an integrated institutional system that generates economic governance mechanisms.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that the Ahi system functioned as an inclusive institutional structure that generated trust, reduced transaction costs, strengthened social capital, and expanded economic participation.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ahilik · Ahi Evran İktisadı · Kurumsal İktisat

Abstract

This study re-evaluates Ahi Evran economics from an institutional political economy perspective and examines the theoretical contributions of the Ahi system to contemporary sustainable development debates. While the existing literature generally approaches Akhism as a historical, cultural, and vocational organization, this study conceptualizes it as an integrated institutional system that generates economic governance mechanisms. Drawing upon historical institutionalism, institutional economics, social capital theory, and moral economy literature, the study develops an original conceptual framework. Within this framework, the core components of the Ahi system—production ethics, commercial morality, social solidarity, vocational training, and institutional supervision—are analyzed in relation to institutional trust, social capital formation, economic inclusiveness, and sustainable development. The findings indicate that the Ahi system functioned as an inclusive institutional structure that generated trust, reduced transaction costs, strengthened social capital, and expanded economic participation. Furthermore, the integration of economic efficiency with social responsibility demonstrates a strong compatibility between Ahi principles and the economic, social, and institutional dimensions of sustainable development. By linking Ahi Evran economics to contemporary debates in institutional economics and sustainable development, the study proposes a novel political economy framework and highlights the continuing relevance of historical institutional arrangements in addressing present-day governance and development challenges.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Ahi Evran iktisadını kurumsal politik ekonomi perspektifinden yeniden değerlendirerek Ahilik sisteminin günümüz sürdürülebilir kalkınma tartışmalarına sağlayabileceği teorik katkıları incelemektedir. Literatürde Ahilik çoğunlukla tarihsel, kültürel ve mesleki bir örgütlenme modeli olarak ele alınırken, bu çalışma Ahiliği ekonomik yönetişim mekanizmaları üreten bütünleşik bir kurumsal sistem olarak analiz etmektedir. Çalışmada tarihsel kurumsalcılık, kurumsal iktisat, sosyal sermaye ve ahlak ekonomisi literatürleri bir araya getirilerek özgün bir kavramsal model geliştirilmiştir. Bu model kapsamında Ahiliğin üretim ahlakı, ticaret etiği, sosyal dayanışma, mesleki eğitim ve kurumsal denetim mekanizmaları incelenmiş; bu unsurların kurumsal güven, sosyal sermaye, ekonomik kapsayıcılık ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma üzerindeki etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, Ahilik sisteminin güven üreten, işlem maliyetlerini azaltan, sosyal sermayeyi güçlendiren ve ekonomik katılımı teşvik eden kapsayıcı bir kurumsal yapı ortaya koyduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca Ahiliğin ekonomik etkinlik ile toplumsal sorumluluğu bütünleştiren yapısı nedeniyle sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın ekonomik, sosyal ve kurumsal boyutlarıyla önemli ölçüde örtüştüğü sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma, Ahi Evran iktisadını çağdaş kurumsal iktisat ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma literatürleriyle ilişkilendirerek özgün bir politik ekonomi çerçevesi sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tezer, H. (2026). REASSESSING THE ECONOMICS OF AHI EVRAN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF INSTITUTIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY. Kamu Ekonomisi ve Kamu Mali Yönetimi Dergisi, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 419–448. https://doi.org/10.71284/jpepfm.2026628

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
  2. Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488–500. https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431
  3. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. University of Chicago Press.
  4. Bowles, S. (2016). The moral economy: Why good incentives are no substitute for good citizens. Yale University Press.
  5. Briguglio, L., Cordina, G., Farrugia, N., & Vella, S. (2009). Economic vulnerability and resilience: Concepts and measurements. Oxford Development Studies, 37(3), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600810903089893
  6. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x
  7. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
  8. Çağatay, N. (1989). Bir Türk kurumu olan Ahilik. Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları.
  9. Ekinci, Y. (1990). Ahilik ve meslek eğitimi. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.
  10. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
  11. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Free Press.
  12. Gölpınarlı, A. (1949–1950). İslâm ve Türk illerinde fütüvvet teşkilâtı ve kaynakları. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 11(1–4), 6–354. İSAM Makaleler
  13. Gölpınarlı, A. (1953–1954). Burgâzî ve “Fütüvvet-Nâme”si. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 15(1–4), 76–154. TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi
  14. Gölpınarlı, A. (1955–1956). Şeyh Seyyid Gaybî oğlu Şeyh Seyyid Hüseyin’in “Fütüvvet-Nâme”si. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 17(1–4), 27–72. Türk Maarif Ansiklopedisi
  15. Güllülü, S. (1977). Sosyoloji açısından Ahilik. Ötüken Neşriyat.
  16. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (Eds.). (2001). Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford University Press.
  17. Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–957. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x
  18. Mazzucato, M. (2018). The value of everything: Making and taking in the global economy. Allen Lane.
  19. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
  20. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.
  21. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
  22. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press.
  23. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011
  24. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
  25. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Farrar & Rinehart.
  26. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
  27. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. Chelsea Green Publishing.
  28. Rodrik, D. (2011). The globalization paradox: Democracy and the future of the world economy. W. W. Norton.
  29. Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press.
  30. Scott, J. C. (1976). The moral economy of the peasant: Rebellion and subsistence in Southeast Asia. Yale University Press.
  31. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
  32. Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. W. W. Norton.
  33. Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: How today’s divided society endangers our future. W. W. Norton.
  34. Streeck, W., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2005). Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford University Press.
  35. Tabakoğlu, A. (2013). İslam iktisadına giriş. Dergâh Yayınları.
  36. Taeschner, F. (1953–1954). İslâm Ortaçağında Futuvva (Fütüvvet Teşkilâtı) (F. Işıltan, Çev.). İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 15(1–4), 3–32. İSAM Makaleler
  37. Taeschner, F. (1972). İslâm’da Fütüvvet Teşkilâtının doğuşu meselesi ve tarihî ana çizgileri (S. Yüksel, Çev.). Belleten, 36(142), 203–236. https://doi.org/10.37879/belleten.1972.142-203
  38. Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 369–404. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.369
  39. Thompson, E. P. (1971). The moral economy of the English crowd in the eighteenth century. Past & Present, 50, 76–136. https://doi.org/10.1093/past/50.1.76
  40. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
  41. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.