IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Heterodox Economics and its Critics


  • Frederic S. Lee


Heterodox economics has its critics. Most of the criticisms are friendly comments and analysis directed towards improving heterodox economic theory. However, the critics and their criticisms that are the concern of this article are the ones that challenge the existence of heterodox economic theory and the community of heterodox economists as manifested through their graduate programs, conferences, journals and identity. These critics observe that the academic status quo in economics, as manifested in its department and journal rankings, rules of academic engagement, and its institutions and organizations, favor mainstream economics and that it is unlikely to change in the future. Consequently, they argue that heterodox economists can survive only if they become more like mainstream economists. With focus on assimilation, the critics direct their criticisms towards the social characteristics of the heterodox community and to the personal characteristics of heterodox economists. This article is a response to the critics.

Suggested Citation

  • Frederic S. Lee, 2012. "Heterodox Economics and its Critics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 337-351, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:24:y:2012:i:2:p:337-351 DOI: 10.1080/09538259.2012.664360

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Simon Wren-Lewis, 2011. "Internal consistency, price rigidity and the microfoundations of macroeconomics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 129-146.
    2. Louis-Philippe Rochon & Peter Docherty, 2012. "Engagement with the Mainstream in the Future of Post Keynesian Economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 503-518, July.
    3. Giuseppe Fontana & Bill Gerrard, 2006. "The future of Post Keynesian economics," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 59(236), pages 49-80.
    4. George A. Akerlof, 2009. "How Human Psychology Drives the Economy and Why It Matters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1175-1175.
    5. Paul Davidson, 2000. "There Are Major Differences between Kalecki’s Theory of Employment and Keynes’s General Theory of Employment Interest and Money," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 3-25, September.
    6. J.E. King, 2005. "Unwarping the record: a reply to Paul Davidson," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 377-384.
    7. repec:psl:bnlaqr:1993:33 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:psl:bnlqrr:1993:33 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Paul Davidson, 2008. "Is the current financial distress caused by the subprime mortgage crisis a Minsky moment? or is it the result of attempting to securitize illiquid noncommercial mortgage loans?," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 669-676, July.
    10. Esther-Mirjam Sent, 2004. "Behavioral Economics: How Psychology Made Its (Limited) Way Back Into Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 36(4), pages 735-760, Winter.
    11. David Colander, 2009. "How Did Macro Theory Get So Far off Track, and what Can Heterodox Macroeconomists Do to Get it Back On Track?," Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0911, Middlebury College, Department of Economics.
    12. Therese Jefferson & J. E. King, 2010. "Can Post Keynesians make better use of behavioral economics?," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 211-234, January.
    13. George A. Akerlof, 2003. "Behavioral Macroeconomics and Macroeconomic Behavior," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 47(1), pages 25-47, March.
    14. David Colander, 2007. "Introduction to The Making of an Economist, Redux," Introductory Chapters,in: The Making of an Economist, Redux Princeton University Press.
    15. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2009. ""Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?" New Answers to Veblen's Old Question," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 867-898.
    16. Paul Davidson, 2005. "Responses to Lavoie, King, and Dow on what Post Keynesianism is and who is a Post Keynesian," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 393-408.
    17. Peter E. Earl & Ti-Ching Peng, 2012. "Brands of Economics and the Trojan Horse of Pluralism," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 451-467, July.
    18. John B. Davis, 2008. "The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 349-366, May.
    19. David Colander & Hugo Nopo Key Words: Latin American economics, global economics, political economy, graduate training, Latin America, applied economics, 2007. "The Making of a Latin American Global Economist," Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0705, Middlebury College, Department of Economics.
    20. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2012. "A Guide to Paradigmatic Self-Marginalization: Lessons for Post-Keynesian Economists," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 469-487, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Tae-Hee Jo, 2016. "Frederic S. Lee and His Fight for the Future of Heterodox Economics," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 69(278), pages 267-278.
    2. Zacchia, Giulia, 2016. "Segregation or homologation? Gender differences in recent Italian economic thought," MPRA Paper 72279, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Jo, Tae-Hee, 2016. "The Social Provisioning Process and Heterodox Economics," MPRA Paper 72384, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:taf:revpoe:v:24:y:2012:i:2:p:337-351. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: .

    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.