Ce que nous ne savons pas des mécanismes de l’administration financière

Barbiche, Bernard

doi:10.4000/books.igpde.5717

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the literature on monarchic institutions and more specifically the Contrôle Général , see Bosher, Single Duty Project ; Bosher, ‘ Premiers commis ’; Mousnier, ed., Un nouveau Colbert ; Richet, France modern ; Bayard and Monnier, eds., Administration ; Monnier, ‘Administration des finances’; Antoine, Cœur de l’État . On the bureaucrats, see Ricommard, ‘Subdélégués’; Gruder, Royal provincial intendants ; Antoine, ‘Notion de subdélégation’; Grevet, ‘Etre subdélégué’; Mukerji, ‘Jurisdiction’.…”

unclassified

“…Bonnassieux and Lelong, Conseil de Commerce , is an indispensable index of the Bureau ’s archives from 1700 until 1790. On the Intendants du Commerce , who constituted the administrative backbone of the Bureau and should not be confused with the Intendants , who were the representatives of the Crown in the provinces, see Schaeper, French Council ; Garrigues, ‘Intendants’; Antoine, Coeur de l’État .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mercantilism and bureaucratic modernization in early eighteenth‐century France

Beuve

Brousseau

Sgard

2016

The Economic History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

French mercantilism is generally associated with absolutist policy‐making subject to capture by rent‐seeking interests. This article investigates how the Bureau du Commerce, a small state agency in charge of commerce and the supply side, handed out rents and privileges to private entrepreneurs. We coded how the Bureau investigated and decided all 267 voluntary submissions received between 1724 and 1744. It is shown that the Bureau’s formal, rule‐based decision‐making process could actually differentiate between alternate policy aims and target them consistently over time, with more or less powerful sets of rents. From this, a hierarchy of revealed policy preferences is derived. First comes technical innovation and diffusion, then local economic development; import substitution is only in the third position, followed by consumers’ welfare. Lastly, and in contrast to a long line of authors, it is shown that the production of luxury goods was not a significant or valued objective.

show abstract

unclassified

mentioning

confidence: 99%