IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v43y2019i5p1315-1332..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neutral technical progress and the measure of value: along the Kaldor–Kennedy line

Author

Listed:
  • Up Sira Nukulkit

Abstract

In this paper, I investigate the question of ‘the effect of progress upon distribution’ based on the analyses of Hicks, Robinson, Harrod, Salter, Kaldor, Samuelson and Kennedy. The paper aims to address a neglected and controversial theoretical argument on neutral technical progress related to the measure of value that preceded and then continued to the period of the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversy. I focus on Kennedy’s writings and his solutions to the complications between the measure of value and technical progress. Important intuitions behind the measure of value are crucial to the formulation of neutral technical progress in both the post-Keynesian and the neoclassical-Keynesian endogenous growth models. The paper concludes with mathematical illustrations of neutral technical progress theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Up Sira Nukulkit, 2019. "Neutral technical progress and the measure of value: along the Kaldor–Kennedy line," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 43(5), pages 1315-1332.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:43:y:2019:i:5:p:1315-1332.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bey050
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:cambje:v:43:y:2019:i:5:p:1315-1332.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.