Author
Abstract
The paper evaluates the contribution of Nobel Prize-winning American economist Edmund Phelps to the development of contemporary economics. The author analyzes Phelps’ structuralist theory of employment and compares his views with the ideas of other acclaimed economists such as Milton Friedman, John M. Keynes, and Friedrich A. Hayek. Godłów-Legiędź looks at Phelps’ achievements in the context of the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences’ decision to grant him a Nobel Prize, and describes Phelps’ position on some key dilemmas of 20th century economics. According to Godłów-Legiędź, the assessment of Phelps’ achievements offered by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences is in fact incomplete, because it overlooks his structuralist theory of employment. Phelps, who calls himself a structuralist, considers this theory of employment to be his most important contribution to macroeconomics, Godłów-Legiędź notes. Phelps’ achievements cannot be viewed exclusively in terms of the link between inflation and unemployment, she says. It is necessary to consider the economist’s focus on what he described as “endogenizing the natural rate of unemployment,” an approach that reveals the differences between Phelps’ theory and those of Keynes and his followers as well as the monetarists and neoclassicists. Defining the natural rate of unemployment as a function of real demand and supply, Phelps referred to the 1930s dispute between Keynes and Hayek that involved the classicist and Austrian interpretations of key economic relationships. Phelps’ unorthodox approach is reflected not only by his theory and attitude to neoclassical economics, Godłów-Legiędź says, but also by his assessment of European and American capitalism and his belief about the need for fundamental changes in economic and social policies.
Suggested Citation
Godłów-Legiędź, Janina, 2008.
"Strukturalistyczna teoria zatrudniania Edmunda Phelpsa,"
Gospodarka Narodowa-The Polish Journal of Economics, Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie / SGH Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 2008(9), September.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:polgne:356608
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.356608
Download full text from publisher
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:ags:polgne:356608. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irsghpl.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.