IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/xequg.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Cambridge capital controversies (CCC) as market and firm structure controversies: modern neoclassical interpretation

Author

Listed:
  • Review, Blind

Abstract

How dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models, widely used in mainstream macroeconomics, revive neoclassical capital theory parables and the uniform rate of interest is analyzed. While Arrow-Debreu-McKenzie (ADM) general equilibrium models disallow such a revival, DSGE has agents re-optimizing at each period, along with separate intra-period budget constraints, which then result in first-order conditions that lead to the resurrection of capital aggregation and the traditional neoclassical capital theory. Despite these initially positive results for neoclassicals, the Cambridge capital controversies (CCC) can be re-cast in form of market and firm structure: quasi-complete contract versus incomplete contract and ADM-style complete market versus DSGE-style incomplete market. In both a theory of the firm and 'ADM versus DSGE,' the question is: why do agents choose the inferior market structure (incomplete contract and DSGE-style incomplete market) that leads to lower expected time-discounted utility? In this sense, CCC is alive even in neoclassical macroeconomics.

Suggested Citation

  • Review, Blind, 2023. "The Cambridge capital controversies (CCC) as market and firm structure controversies: modern neoclassical interpretation," OSF Preprints xequg, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:xequg
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/xequg
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/64d31c869cbf0361171e4689/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/xequg?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John H. Cochrane, 2011. "Determinacy and Identification with Taylor Rules," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(3), pages 565-615.
    2. Milgrom, Paul & Stokey, Nancy, 1982. "Information, trade and common knowledge," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 17-27, February.
    3. Mariana García-Schmidt & Michael Woodford, 2019. "Are Low Interest Rates Deflationary? A Paradox of Perfect-Foresight Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(1), pages 86-120, January.
    4. Cochrane, John H., 2009. "Can learnability save new-Keynesian models?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1109-1113, November.
    5. Oliver Hart, 2011. "Thinking about the Firm: A Review of Daniel Spulber's The Theory of the Firm," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 101-113, March.
    6. Bliss, C. J., 1975. "Capital Theory and the Distribution of Income," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780720436044 edited by Bliss, C. J..
    7. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    8. Lars Ljungqvist & Thomas J. Sargent, 2004. "Recursive Macroeconomic Theory, 2nd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 026212274x, December.
    9. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1982. "Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1345-1370, November.
    10. Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 1999. "Unforeseen Contingencies and Incomplete Contracts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 83-114.
    11. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Athreya, Kartik B., 2014. "Big Ideas in Macroeconomics: A Nontechnical View," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262019736, December.
    2. Jean Barthélemy & Eric Mengus, 2017. "Credibility and Monetary Policy," Working Papers hal-03457527, HAL.
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1lu2rbsv0n8pkqid81q0tfof3f is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Assenza, T. & Heemeijer, P. & Hommes, C.H. & Massaro, D., 2021. "Managing self-organization of expectations through monetary policy: A macro experiment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 170-186.
    5. Vasilev, Aleksandar, 2013. "Essays on Real Business Cycle Modeling and the Public Sector," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 130522, July.
    6. John H. Cochrane, 2017. "Michelson-Morley, Fisher, and Occam: The Radical Implications of Stable Quiet Inflation at the Zero Bound," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2017, volume 32, pages 113-226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jean Barthélemy & Eric Mengus, 2017. "Credibility and Monetary Policy," Working Papers hal-03457527, HAL.
    8. Michael D. Bauer & Carolin E. Pflueger & Adi Sunderam, 2022. "Perceptions about Monetary Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 10182, CESifo.
    9. Franz Seitz & Markus A. Schmidt, 2014. "Money In Modern Macro Models: A Review of the Arguments," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 3, pages 156-174.
    10. Emanuel Gasteiger, 2014. "Heterogeneous Expectations, Optimal Monetary Policy, and the Merit of Policy Inertia," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 46(7), pages 1535-1554, October.
    11. Evans, George W & McGough, Bruce, 2018. "Equilibrium selection, observability and backward-stable solutions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 1-10.
    12. Athanasios Geromichalos & Lucas Herrenbrueck, 2017. "The Liquidity-Augmented Model of Macroeconomic Aggregates," Discussion Papers dp17-16, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    13. Paul Walker, 2015. "Contracts, Entrepreneurs, Market Creation And Judgement: The Contemporary Mainstream Theory Of The Firm In Perspective," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 317-338, April.
    14. Huang-Meier, Winifred & Freeman, Mark C., 2015. "Aggregate dividends and consumption smoothing," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 324-335.
    15. Patrick Minford & Naveen Srinivasan, 2015. "Can the Learnability Criterion Ensure Determinacy in New Keynesian Models?," South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, , vol. 4(1), pages 43-61, June.
    16. J. Subrick & Andrew Young, 2010. "Nobelity and novelty: Finn Kydland and Edward Prescott’s contributions viewed from Vienna," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 35-53, March.
    17. Peter J. Boettke & Alexander W. Salter & Daniel J. Smith, 2018. "Money as meta-rule: Buchanan’s constitutional economics as a foundation for monetary stability," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 529-555, September.
    18. Goodhart, Charles, 1989. "The Conduct of Monetary Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(396), pages 293-346, June.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/293qice3lj861rvos9ns14n0h0 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. John Stachurski, 2009. "Economic Dynamics: Theory and Computation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262012774, December.
    21. Akhand Akhtar Hossain, 2009. "Central Banking and Monetary Policy in the Asia-Pacific," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12777.
    22. Rupert, Peter & Šustek, Roman, 2019. "On the mechanics of New-Keynesian models," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 53-69.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:osfxxx:xequg. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.