To what extent did theories of optimality and techniques for optimization improve economic allocation under Communist rule? The basic ideas turned out to have little practical application–under Communism, at least. Yet, at the time, the idea of an optimally planned Socialist economy attracted huge attention and intellectual efforts from East Germany and other Central and Eastern European countries to Russia and China. What was it all about? This excellent collection provides many fascinating insights from a nearly forgotten chapter in the economic thought and history of eight Communist countries. There are important lessons for public policy everywhere.

Mark Harrison, professor emeritus, University of Warwick

Central planning was a defining quality of state socialism, yet we know little about how it actually worked (or did not). Communist Planning versus Rationality is thus a much-desired addition to the comparative history of state socialism, presenting richly researched case studies about grand plans that suffered from their disconnect from reality. This makes this intriguing book a very timely warning about the costs of pursuing imagined truths while academic freedom and intellectual curiosity are curtailed.

Ulf Brunnbauer, Leibniz Institute for East and Southeast European Studies

Can mathematics make economic planning more rational; can it save planning from its previous failures? The contributors to János Mátyás Kovács’s volume—each eminently qualified—explore this question by taking deep dives into former Communist countries that attempted to plan their economies centrally and comprehensively. The lesson that emerges is clear: the problem with planning is not something that mathematics and econometrics can rehabilitate. The problem is one of knowledge that cannot, in principle, be formalized and distributed through some sort of comprehensive plan. Rationality-as-optimality is an illusion. Both critics and contemporary proponents of optimal planning should read this important book.

David L. Prychitko, Northern Michigan University

This book is a genuine contribution to the history of economic thought, where the global context, the interactions between institutional and theoretical developments on both sides of the Cold War are investigated. After a stimulating volume following a similar comparative approach on the concept of ownership, this important collective book extends the historical research on the great questions of economic planning which were so significant and controversial in the twentieth century. They completely receded but may well come back under different ways and objectives in our current capitalist era.

Bernard Chavance, emeritus professor, University of Paris Diderot

This is a book with many virtues. The analytical framework articulated by Kovács compellingly amalgamates insights from various scholarly literatures that touch upon the question of economic planning, including the history of economic ideas, general studies of Soviet-type economies, and in-depth explorations of the various practices and methods deployed in the process of planning in the former ‘second world.; The case studies carry a distinct local flavor, but also cohere remarkably well into a volume that never loses its narrative focus. There is a big picture that comes out of the volume¬—the ongoing efforts to optimize the process of central planning ultimately failed. But the book is also rich in fascinating details about the intellectual debates that enlivened the community of professional economists in Eastern Europe during the second half of the last century, the evolution of the various research and political institutions that constituted the natural habitat of this community, and the tensions that inevitably marked its relationship with the leadership of the ruling communist parties. This edited collection will undoubtedly become the point of departure for any future conversation about the idea of central planning and the array of problems which efforts to implement this idea in practice are destined to encounter

Venelin I. Ganev, Miami University of Ohio