Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Wissenschaftlicher Pluralismus als Entdeckungsverfahren und das Monopol der Modellökonomik

Contents:

Author Info

  • Dürmeier, Thomas

Abstract

In dieser Arbeit wird untersucht, ob Wettbewerb in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften existiert. Es besteht ein Monopol der heutigen neoklassischen Modellökonomik, was zu einer geringen Pluralität der wissenschaftlichen Ansätze und Perspektiven führt. Der wissenschaftliche Fortschritt wird behindert und das hat negative Folgen für die Wirtschaft und die Politik. Dies wird an Beispiele aus der Finanzkrise, bibliometrischen Ergebnisse und Fallbeispiele aus bundesdeutschen Hochschulen verdeutlicht. Als Fazit wird eine wissenschaftspolitische Intervention in die Volkswirtschaftslehre für mehr Pluralität gefordert: ein Code of Conduct für ÖkonomInnen, eine Quote für heterodoxe Lehrmeinungen und die Gründung eines Instituts für plurale Ökonomik in der Bundesrepublik. --

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/59573/1/71827928X.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS) in its series Discussion Papers with number 30.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:cessdp:30

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.wiso.uni-hamburg.de/forschung/zoess/english-versioncess/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Pluralismus; Wirtschaftswissenschaften; Monopol; Heterodoxe Ökonomik; Wissenschaftssoziologie;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Frederic Lee & Steve Keen, 2004. "The Incoherent Emperor: A Heterodox Critique of Neoclassical Microeconomic Theory," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(2), pages 169-199.
  2. Manishi Prasad & Peter Wahlqvist & Rich Shikiar & Ya-Chen Tina Shih, 2004. "A," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 22(4), pages 225-244.
  3. Gebhard Kirchgassner, 2009. "Die Krise der Wirtschaft: Auch eine Krise der Wirtschaftswissenschaften?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-15, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
  4. George DeMartino, 2005. "A Professional Ethics Code for Economists," Challenge, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 48(4), pages 88-104, August.
  5. Mark Granovetter, 2005. "The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 33-50, Winter.
  6. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
  7. Stephan Schulmeister, 2009. "Asset Price Fluctuations, Financial Crises and the Stabilizing Effects of a General Transaction Tax," WIFO Working Papers 340, WIFO.
  8. Frederic S. Lee, 2007. "The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 309-325, March.
  9. David Colander, 2005. "The Making of an Economist Redux," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 175-198, Winter.
  10. Frederic S. Lee & Therese C. Grijalva & Clifford Nowell, 2010. "Ranking Economics Departments in a Contested Discipline," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(5), pages 1345-1375, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:cessdp:30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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