Critica della teoria neoclassica della crescita e della distribuzione
The paper surveys the main theories of income distribution in their relationship with the theories of economic growth. First, the Classical approach is considered, focusing on the Ricardian theory. Then the neoclassical theory is discussed, highlighting its origins (Bohm-Bawerk, Wicksell, Clark) and the role of the aggregate production function. The emergence of a "Keynesian" theory of income distribution in the wake of Harrod's model of growth is then recalled together with the surprising resurgence of the neoclassical theory (following the contributions of Solow and Meade). But, as the paper shows, the neoclassical theory of income distribution lacks logical consistency and has shaky foundations, as has been revealed by the severe critiques moved to the neoclassical production function. Mainstream economic literature circumvents this problem by simply ignoring it; while the models of endogenous growth exclude the issue of distribution theory from their consideration. However, while mainstream economics bypasses the problems of income distribution, this is too relevant an issue to be ignored and a number of new research lines, briefly surveyed, try new approaches to it.
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.:
- Oded Galor & Joseph Zeira, 1993.
"Income Distribution and Macroeconomics,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Oxford University Press, vol. 60(1), pages 35-52.
- Robert M. Solow, 2000. "La teoria neoclassica della crescita e della distribuzione," Moneta e Credito, Economia civile, vol. 53(210), pages 149-185.
- Bertola, Giuseppe, 1993.
"Factor Shares and Savings in Endogenous Growth,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1184-98, December.
- Atkinson, A B, 1997.
"Bringing Income Distribution in from the Cold,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(441), pages 297-321, March.
- Hahn, Frank, 1982. "The Neo-Ricardians," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 353-74, December.
- Alberto Alesina & Dani Rodrik, 1994. "Distributive Politics and Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 465-490.
- Alberto Alesina & Dani Rodrik, 1991.
"Distributive Politics and Economic Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
3668, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- D. G. Champernowne, 1953. "The Production Function and the Theory of Capital: A Comment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 112-135.
- Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1967.
"Distribution of Income and Wealth Among Individuals,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
238, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1969. "Distribution of Income and Wealth among Individuals," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(3), pages 382-97, July.
- Fisher, Franklin M, 1971. "Aggregate Production Functions and the Explanation of Wages: A Simulation Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 53(4), pages 305-25, November.
- Burmeister,Edwin, 1980. "Capital Theory and Dynamics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521297035, june. pag.
- Alan P. Kirman, 1992. "Whom or What Does the Representative Individual Represent?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(2), pages 117-136, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:psl:moneta:2000:22. 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: (Carlo D'Ippoliti)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.