IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/swe/wpaper/2014-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Cambridge, England, Critique of the Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution

Author

Listed:
  • Geoff C. Harcourt

    (School of Economics, Australian School of Business, the University of New South Wales)

Abstract

The Cambridge critique of the marginal productivity theory of distribution is entwined with the critics’ theories of value, price, distribution, capital, growth, and methodology that occurred alongside it. The article first discusses these dimensions, then the inescapable need to explain the origin and size and rate of profits in any approach to the theory of distribution. The need in the neoclassical approach to have a unit in which to measure capital that is independent of distribution and prices is examined. The alternative classical/Marxian alternative and the relationship of pricing and market structures to systemic relationships in Post-Keynesian theory are analysed. Unresolved debates among the critics of the mainstream are outlined including those between Garegnani and Hahn. Ways forward are suggested in the concluding section.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Geoff C. Harcourt, 2014. "On the Cambridge, England, Critique of the Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution," Discussion Papers 2014-37, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
  • Handle: RePEc:swe:wpaper:2014-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://research.economics.unsw.edu.au/RePEc/papers/2014-37.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avi J. Cohen, 2003. "Retrospectives: Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 199-214, Winter.
    2. K. Velupillai, 1975. "Irving Fisher on "Switches of Techniques": A Historical Note," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 679-680.
    3. Hahn, Frank, 1982. "The Neo-Ricardians," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 353-374, December.
    4. Joan Robinson, 1975. "The Unimportance of Reswitching," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 89(1), pages 32-39.
    5. G. C. Harcourt, 1981. "Marshall, Sraffa and Keynes: Incompatible Bedfellows," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 39-50, Jan-Mar.
    6. E. H. Phelps Brown, 1957. "The Meaning of the Fitted Cobb-Douglas Function," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 546-560.
    7. Pasinetti, Luigi L, 1969. "Switches of Technique and the "Rate of Return" in Capital Theory," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 79(315), pages 508-531, September.
    8. Mandler, Michael, 2001. "Dilemmas in Economic Theory: Persisting Foundational Problems of Microeconomics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195145755.
    9. Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720, July.
    10. P. Garegnani, 1970. "A Reply," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 439-439.
    11. Pierangelo Garegnani, 2005. "Capital And Intertemporal Equilibria: A Reply To Mandler," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 411-437, November.
    12. Andrés Lazzarini, 2015. "Some Unsettled Issues in a Second Phase of the Cambridge-Cambridge Controversy," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 47(2), pages 256-273, June.
    13. Bertram Schefold, 2013. "Approximate surrogate production functions," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(5), pages 1161-1184.
    14. Harris, Donald J, 1975. "The Theory of Economic Growth: A Critique and Reformulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 329-337, May.
    15. Simon, Herbert A, 1979. "Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
    16. Michael Mandler, 2002. "Classical and Neoclassical Indeterminacy in One-shot Versus Ongoing Equilibria," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 203-222, August.
    17. Paul A. Samuelson, 1975. "Steady-State and Transient Relations: A Reply on Reswitching," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 89(1), pages 40-47.
    18. P. Garegnani, 1970. "Heterogeneous Capital, the Production Function and the Theory of Distribution," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 407-436.
    19. Ronald L. Meek, 1961. "Mr. Sraffa'S Rehabilitation Of Classical Economics1," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 8(2), pages 119-136, June.
    20. 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 305-325, November.
    21. Bhaduri, Amit & Robinson, Joan, 1980. "Accumulation and Exploitation: An Analysis in the Tradition of Marx, Sraffa and Kalecki," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 103-115, June.
    22. Pierangelo Garegnani, 2012. "On the present state of the capital controversy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(6), pages 1417-1432.
    23. Shaikh, Anwar, 1974. "Laws of Production and Laws of Algebra: The Humbug Production Function," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(1), pages 115-120, February.
    24. 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.
    25. Hahn, F H, 1975. "Revival of Political Economy: The Wrong Issues and the Wrong Argument," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 51(135), pages 360-364, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fix, Blair, 2018. "Capitalist income and hierarchical power: A gradient hypothesis," Working Papers on Capital as Power 2018/06, Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism.
    2. Up Sira Nukulkit, 2018. "Neutral Technical Progress and the Measure of Value: along the Kaldor-Kennedy line," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2018_05, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    3. Fix, Blair, 2019. "How the rich are different: Hierarchical power as the basis of income and class," Working Papers on Capital as Power 2019/02, Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism.
    4. Harvey Gram & Geoffrey Harcourt, 2015. "Joan Robinson and MIT," Working Papers 9, City University of New York Graduate Center, Ph.D. Program in Economics.
    5. Fix, Blair, 2019. "How the rich are different: Hierarchical power as the basis of income size and class," Working Papers on Capital as Power 2019/02 (v.2), Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism.
    6. Fix, Blair, 2018. "Capitalist Income and Hierarchical Power," SocArXiv u8epv, Center for Open Science.
    7. Blair Fix, 2019. "The Aggregation Problem: Implications for Ecological and Biophysical Economics," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, March.
    8. Fix, Blair, 2018. "The aggregation problem: Implications for ecological economics," Working Papers on Capital as Power 2018/03, Capital As Power - Toward a New Cosmology of Capitalism.
    9. Fix, Blair, 2019. "How the Rich Are Different: Hierarchical Power as the Basis of Income Size and Class," SocArXiv t8muy, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saverio M. Fratini, 2019. "On The Second Stage Of The Cambridge Capital Controversy," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 1073-1093, September.
    2. Carlo Milana, 2019. "Solving the Reswitching Paradox in the Sraffian Theory of Capital," Applied Economics and Finance, Redfame publishing, vol. 6(6), pages 97-125, November.
    3. Avi J. Cohen, 2003. "Retrospectives: Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 199-214, Winter.
    4. Jesus Felipe & Franklin M. Fisher, 2003. "Aggregation in Production Functions: What Applied Economists should Know," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2‐3), pages 208-262, May.
    5. Jesus Felipe & John S.L. McCombie, 2013. "The Aggregate Production Function and the Measurement of Technical Change," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1975.
    6. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 2000. "Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution," Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 383-431.
    7. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 2000. "Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 53(215), pages 383-431.
    8. J. Barkley Rosser, 2020. "Austrian themes and the Cambridge capital theory controversies," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 415-431, December.
    9. Avi J. Cohen & Geoffrey C. Harcourt, 2010. "Reswitching and Reversing in Capital Theory," Chapters, in: Mark Blaug & Peter Lloyd (ed.), Famous Figures and Diagrams in Economics, chapter 24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Vienneau, Robert L., 2019. "Structural economic dynamics, markups, real Wicksell effects, and the reverse substitution of labor," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 216-226.
    11. Jesus Felipe & J. S. L. McCombie, 2005. "How Sound are the Foundations of the Aggregate Production Function?," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 467-488, Summer.
    12. Schefold, Bertram, 2008. "C.E.S. production functions in the light of the Cambridge critique," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 783-797, June.
    13. Kurose, Kazuhiro & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2016. "The Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson Model and the Cambridge Capital Controversies," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2016-05, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    14. Jesus Felipe & F. Gerard Adams, 2005. ""A Theory of Production" The Estimation of the Cobb-Douglas Function: A Retrospective View," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 427-445, Summer.
    15. Jesus Felipe & J. S. L. McCombie, 2002. "A Problem with Some Estimations and Interpretations of the Mark-up in Manufacturing Industry," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 187-215.
    16. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Grazzi, 2005. "Technology as Problem-Solving Procedures and Technology as Input-Output Relations: Some Perspectives on the Theory of Production," LEM Papers Series 2005/26, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    17. Harvey Gram, 2003. "Joan Robinson: classical revivalist or neoclassical critic?," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 493-508.
    18. Joseph Halevi, 1985. "Switching and Employment," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 229-234, Jul-Sep.
    19. Villar Otálora, Juan Camilo, 2021. "Una revisión sobre los métodos convencionales de la contabilidad del crecimiento: La tiranía de la identidad [A review of the conventional methods of growth accounting: The tyranny of identity]," MPRA Paper 106683, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B1 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925
    • B10 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - General
    • B2 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925
    • B20 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - General
    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • B5 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches
    • B51 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Socialist; Marxian; Sraffian
    • E1 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models
    • E10 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - General
    • E11 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Marxian; Sraffian; Kaleckian
    • E12 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Keynes; Keynesian; Post-Keynesian; Modern Monetary Theory

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:swe:wpaper:2014-37. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/senswau.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Hongyi Li (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/senswau.html .

    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.