The Kaldor/Knight controversy: Is capital a distinct and quantifiable factor of production?
Controversy focuses on three questions: Is capital a distinct factor of production? Is capital quantifiable in a theoretically consistent manner? Are process stories necessary around convergence to, or changes in, equilibrium interest rates? To all, Kaldor answers 'yes' to Knight's 'no'. The controversy is historically important in: 1) shifting issues in recurring twentieth century capital theory controversies from periods of production to production functions, from roundaboutness to diminishing returns; 2) revealing Knight's position on increasing knowledge offsetting diminishing returns over time as an unacknowledged 'precursor' of new growth theory; 3) marking the turning point for Kaldor's attachment to Austrian theory.
Volume (Year): 13 (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REJH20|
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.:
- Harcourt, G C, 1969.
"Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 369-405, June.
- Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720, October.
- Targetti, Ferdinando, 1992. "Nicholas Kaldor: The Economics and Politics of Capitalism as a Dynamic System," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283485, July.
- Romer, Paul M, 1986.
"Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-37, October.
- Milgate, Murray, 1979. "On the Origin of the Notion of "Intertemporal Equilibrium"," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 46(181), pages 1-10, February.
- Christian Gehrke, 2003. "The Ricardo Effect: Its Meaning and Validity," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 70(277), pages 143-158, February.
- Harald Hagemann & Hans-Michael Trautwein, 1998. "Cantillon and Ricardo effects: Hayek's contributions to business cycle theory," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 292-316.
- A. Cohen & G. Harcourt., 2009. "Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 8.
- Blaug,Mark, 1997. "Economic Theory in Retrospect," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521577014, October.
- Peter Boettke & Karen Vaughn, 2002. "Knight and the Austrians on Capital, and the Problem of Socialism," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 155-176, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:13:y:2006:i:1:p:141-161. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.