Do Heterodox Theories Have Anything in Common? A Post-Keynesian Point of View
AbstractThe paper questions the wide-spread assertion that non-orthodox schools of thought in economics have only one thing in common â€“ their rejection of mainstream (neoclassical) economics. The author shows by contrast that heterodox currents share some fundamental analytical insights. The paper focuses on a comparison of modern Marxist conceptions with those of Post-Keynesian economists, including the works of Kaleckians and Sraffians. This is shown by examining four fields: the issue of rationality (where the adjustment principle is explicitly accepted by important heterodox authors), price theory (with cost-plus pricing combined to some long-run adjustment), growth theory (where the Kaleckian model has been adopted by authors from all schools), and finally monetary theory (where authors from all backgrounds are successfully integrating real and monetary analysis by taking into account financial markets). The author concludes that mutual feedback between the various heterodox currents has been beneficial to all, despite an unavoidable hyper-specialisation.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Edward Elgar in its journal Intervention. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies (subtitle initially: Zeitschrift fuer Oekonomie / Journal of Economics).
Volume (Year): 3 (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elgaronline.com/ejeep
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- B5 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Eckhard Hein & Marc Lavoie & Till van Treeck, 2011.
"Some instability puzzles in Kaleckian models of growth and distribution: a critical survey,"
Cambridge Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 587-612.
- Eckhard Hein & Marc Lavoie & Till van Treeck, 2008. "Some instability puzzles in Kaleckian models of growth and distribution: A critical survey," IMK Working Paper 19-2008, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
- Esteban Perez Caldentey & Matias Vernengo, 2013. "Wage and Profit-led Growth: The Limits to Neo-Kaleckian Models and a Kaldorian Proposal," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_775, Levy Economics Institute.
- Bernard Philippe & Stéphane Mussard, 2010.
"On the Links Between Unemployment Rate, Monetary Creation and the Value-added Sharing,"
Cahiers de recherche
10-05, Departement d'Economique de la Faculte d'administration à l'Universite de Sherbrooke.
- Mussard, Stéphane & Philippe, Bernard, 2011. "On the links between unemployment rate, monetary creation and the value-added sharing," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 767-774, May.
- Mariolis, Theodore, 2007. "Distribution and Growth in an Economy with Heterogeneous Capital and Excess Capacity," MPRA Paper 24042, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kronenberg, Tobias, 2010. "Finding common ground between ecological economics and post-Keynesian economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1488-1494, May.
- Engelbert Stockhammer & Paul Ramskogler, 2009. "Wie weiter? Zur Zukunft des Postkeynesianismus," Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - WuG, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik, vol. 35(3), pages 329-354.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Emily Milsom).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.