IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/fosoec/v28y1998i1p23-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Cambridge challenge to the Ricardian analysis of poverty

Author

Listed:
  • James Henderson

Abstract

The Ricardian economists’ famous model of economic growth employed the Malthusian population doctrine, the law of diminishing returns, and the classical or iron law of wages. This analysis was based on utilitarian moral philosophy. The gloomy Stationary State conclusions of the Ricardian growth model — maldistribution of income and widespread poverty — were challenged by both economists and moral philosophers. A particularly important challenge was that offered by William Whewell (1794--1866), Professor of Moral Philosophy and the dominant figure at the University of Cambridge. Whewell is remembered today for his early contributions to mathematical economics. This article begins with a review of the Ricardian growth model. Next, Whewell’s system of moral philosophy is examined and the scientific and religious basis of Whewell’s antagonism to Ricardian economics is considered. After considering Whewell’s treatment of agricultural progress, economic classes, and rent doctrine, his own model of economic growth is analyzed. Finally, Whewell’s appraisal of the duty of government to those harmed by development is explored.

Suggested Citation

  • James Henderson, 1998. "The Cambridge challenge to the Ricardian analysis of poverty," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 23-34, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:28:y:1998:i:1:p:23-34
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02746414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02746414
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02746414?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:28:y:1998:i:1:p:23-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFSE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.