IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/rfreco/rfeco_0769-0479_2010_num_24_4_1766.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Théories réelles versus monétaires des cycles d’équilibre

Author

Listed:
  • Muriel Dal-Pont Legrand
  • Harald Hagemann

Abstract

[eng] After dominance of growth theory for more than two decades, business-cycle theory entered centre stage again in the 1970s. Different attempts, by various authors, have tried to connect these modern contributions to the interwar debates : from Lucas [ 1977], quoting Hayek on the challenge to incorporate cyclical phenomena into the system of economic equilibrium theory, to Plosser [ 1989] defending a purely real approach to business cycles from a methodological point of view. Plosser also referred to Hicks’s position in his controversy with Hayek on the fundamental nature of fluctuations. Despite the success of the modern literature in providing an Equilibrium Business Cycle theory, at first sight it seems that the same (old) debate confronting real versus monetary approaches is still there. A closer inspection shows that the modern tools deeply affected the nature of the arguments. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between the interwar and the modern debates on how economic theory deals with fluctuations. [fre] Après la domination de la théorie de la croissance pendant plus de deux décennies, la théorie des cycles occupa de nouveau le devant de la scène dans les années 1970. Certains auteurs tentèrent à plusieurs reprises de relier ces contributions modernes aux débats de l’entre-deux guerres : de Lucas [ 1977], citant Hayek à propos du défi que représente l’incorporation des phénomènes cycliques dans une théorie du système économique élaborée en termes d’équilibre, à Plosser [ 1989] défendant une approche purement réelle des cycles sur des bases méthodologiques. Plosser fera sur ce point référence à la position de Hicks dans la controverse qui l’opposa à Hayek concernant la nature fondamentale des fluctuations. En dépit du succès de la littérature moderne à produire une théorie des cycles d’équilibre, il apparaît à première vue que le même débat, déjà ancien, opposant les théories monétaires aux théories réelles des cycles est toujours présent. Une analyse plus poussée montre que les outils modernes de la dynamique ont profondément modifié la nature des arguments. L’objectif de cet article consiste à comparer les débats de l’entre-deux guerres avec ceux des années 1970 concernant l’analyse des fluctuations par la théorie économique.

Suggested Citation

  • Muriel Dal-Pont Legrand & Harald Hagemann, 2010. "Théories réelles versus monétaires des cycles d’équilibre," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 24(4), pages 189-229.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:rfreco:rfeco_0769-0479_2010_num_24_4_1766
    DOI: 10.3406/rfeco.2010.1766
    Note: DOI:10.3406/rfeco.2010.1766
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/rfeco.2010.1766
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/rfeco_0769-0479_2010_num_24_4_1766
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hagemann Harald, 2019. "Impulses and Propagation Mechanisms in Equilibrium Business Cycles Theories: From Interwar Debates to DSGE “Consensus”," Working Papers halshs-02386344, HAL.
    2. Michaël Assous & Muriel Dal Pont Legrand & Harald Hagemann, 2016. "Business cycles and growth," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.),Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 4, pages 27-39, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    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:prs:rfreco:rfeco_0769-0479_2010_num_24_4_1766. 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: (Equipe PERSEE). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/rfeco .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.