This is a single-author programmatic journal essay: Böhm-Bawerk presents the Austrian School’s theoretical project, its relation to the Methodenstreit, and its distinctive use of marginal utility as a reconstructive principle for economics.
Das Arbeitsfeld der österreichischen Ökonomisten ist die Theorie im strengen Sinne des Wortes.
English translation: The field of work of the Austrian economists is theory in the strict sense of the word.
The essay’s central thesis is that the Austrian School is not chiefly a methodological faction, but a movement for rebuilding positive economic theory from its foundations. Böhm-Bawerk agrees that classical economics is incomplete, yet rejects the historical school’s remedy of replacing abstraction with empirical accumulation. For him, historical material is necessary but cannot substitute for theory:
Denn ohne Abstraktion gibt es überhaupt keine Wissenschaft.
English translation: For without abstraction there is no science at all.
The opening therefore reframes the Methodenstreit as secondary. The Austrians were drawn into methodological polemic only because their theoretical work was attacked. Their real task is constructive:
Die Hauptsache war und ist ihnen die Reform der positiven Theorie.
English translation: The main concern was, and is, for them the reform of positive theory.
That reform begins with value. Böhm-Bawerk gives a compact account of marginal utility: the value of a good depends not on the use to which it happens to be assigned, but on the least important satisfaction that would be lost if the good were unavailable. The farmer with three sacks of grain will not starve if one burns; he reallocates the remaining sacks and sacrifices the least important use. This makes marginal utility the principle behind substitution, valuation, and rational economic adjustment.
Die Idee des Grenznutzens ist gleichsam ein Zauberschlüssel, mit dem der Kundige die verwickeltsten Erscheinungen des wirtschaftlichen Lebens und die schwierigsten Probleme der Wissenschaft erschließen kann.
English translation: The idea of marginal utility is, as it were, a magic key with which the initiated can unlock the most tangled phenomena of economic life and the most difficult problems of the science.
The essay then traces that “key” through exchange, price, production, cost, and distribution. In market exchange, subjective valuations are mediated by money and substitution: the loss of a coat, for example, becomes the loss of whatever other satisfactions could have been bought with its replacement price. Price is therefore not an autonomous market fact but a resultant of marginal valuations, roughly determined around the valuation of the “last buyer.” Böhm-Bawerk emphasizes that the Austrians thereby escape the circularity of older supply-and-demand theories, which explained price by valuations and valuations by price.
The most important conceptual move concerns cost. Older theory treated production costs as the ultimate regulator of value. Böhm-Bawerk reverses the causal direction: costs are themselves values of productive goods, and those values derive from the value of the products they help produce.
Das Verhältnis von Ursache und Wirkung ist also gerade umgekehrt, als die ältere Theorie es darstellte.
English translation: The relation of cause and effect is thus precisely the reverse of what the older theory represented it to be.
This reversal is presented as a Copernican shift in economics. Costs remain indispensable, but they are no longer an explanatory stopping point. They must themselves be explained through marginal utility and the imputed value of future products. The same logic extends to “complementary goods,” goods that cooperate in producing a single result. Here Böhm-Bawerk criticizes classical distribution theory for assigning land, capital, labor, and enterprise their shares by residual explanations that circle back on one another.
Man hat einfach versäumt, das Problem genug allgemein zu stellen.
English translation: One has simply failed to state the problem in sufficiently general terms.
Against this, the Austrian theory of imputation asks how a common economic result is attributed to cooperating factors. Distribution becomes an application of value theory: rent, wages, and interest are prices of complementary productive goods. Thus the theory of value is not one chapter among others; it is the organizing grammar of the whole system.
In its closing movement the essay becomes explicitly programmatic. Böhm-Bawerk defines the Austrian project as a renewal of economics after both classical incompleteness and historical skepticism:
Was sie anstreben, ist eine Art Renaissance der ökonomischen Theorie.
English translation: What they aim at is a kind of renaissance of economic theory.
The classical economists saw many regularities but lacked a sufficiently exact account of the relation between human welfare and goods. The historical school, by distrusting abstraction, deepened empirical knowledge but discouraged theoretical explanation. The Austrian School’s relevance lies in insisting that macroeconomic and institutional phenomena cannot be understood without analyzing the “microcosm” of valuation, substitution, and marginal dependence. Its reform is therefore both methodological and substantive: it restores abstraction by grounding it in experience, and it restores theory by making value, cost, and distribution parts of one explanatory system.
This work was divided into 6 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 6 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian