Hicks is renown for having introduced the temporary equilibrium framework in his book Value and Capital. Subsequently, however, he partially recanted this framework by rejecting the market clearing idea while still keeping the week device. The aim of this paper is to assess whether this change was right. My answer will be broadly negative. To make my point, I will ponder on the meaning and implications of the week device, assess the validity of HicksÕ claim that slow adjustment can cause market rationing, examine his claim that the possibility of market clearing depends on the prevailing market form and, finally, assess his twofold filiations towards Marshall and Walras.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Find related papers by JEL classification: B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics D50 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: