IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Just Another Niche in the Wall? How Specialization Is Changing the Face of Mainstream Economics

Listed author(s):

There is considerable discussion on so-called ‘mainstream pluralism’, that is, on the co-presence of a variety of research programmes in today’s mainstream economics that: 1. significantly deviate from the neoclassical core; 2. are pursued by different, often separate communities of researchers; 3. have their origins outside economics. The literature tends to regard mainstream pluralism as a transitory state towards a new, post-neoclassical, mainstream. This paper advances a new interpretation: it suggests that the changing and fragmented state of mainstream economics is likely to persist over time under the impact of specialization (as a self-reinforcing mechanism) and the creation of new specialties and approaches, also through collaboration with researchers from other disciplines.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.est.unito.it/do/home.pl/Download?doc=/allegati/wp2017dip/wp_6_2017.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Turin in its series CESMEP Working Papers with number 201702.

as
in new window

Length: pages 38
Date of creation: Mar 2017
Handle: RePEc:uto:cesmep:201702
Contact details of provider: Postal:
+39 011670 4406

Phone: +39 011670 4406
Fax: +39 011670 3895
Web page: http://www.unito.it/

More information through EDIRC

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
  2. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
  3. Randall G. Holcombe, 2008. "Pluralism versus Heterodoxy in Economics and the Social Sciences," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 51-72, March.
  4. Fontana, Magda, 2010. "Can neoclassical economics handle complexity? The fallacy of the oil spot dynamic," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 584-596, December.
  5. Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 2015. "A Trojan Horse for Sociology? Preferences versus Evolution and Morality," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(1-2), pages 93-112, July.
  6. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1985. "The Expanding Domain of Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(6), pages 53-68, December.
  7. Hahn, Frank, 1991. "The Next Hundred Years," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(404), pages 47-50, January.
  8. Davis, John B., 2006. "The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 1-20, April.
  9. Alan Kirman, 2010. "The Economic Crisis is a Crisis for Economic Theory ," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 56(4), pages 498-535, December.
  10. Davis, John B., 2013. "Economics Imperialism under the Impact of Psychology: The Case of Behavioral Development Economics," OEconomia, Editions NecPlus, vol. 2013(01), pages 119-138, March.
  11. Wolfram Elsner, 2013. "State and future of the ‘citadel’ and of the heterodoxies in economics: challenges and dangers, convergences and cooperation," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 10(3), pages 286—298-2, December.
  12. Gintis, Herbert & Helbing, Dirk, 2015. "Homo Socialis: An Analytical Core for Sociological Theory," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(1-2), pages 1-59, July.
  13. Sheila Dow, 2004. "Structured pluralism," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 275-290.
  14. David Colander, 2014. "The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 516-525, October.
  15. Bruce Caldwell, 2013. "Presidential Address — Of Positivism and the History of Economic Thought," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 753-767, April.
  16. Hechter, Michael, 2015. "Why Economists Should Pay Heed to Sociology," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(1-2), pages 89-92, July.
  17. David Dequech, 2007. "Neoclassical, mainstream, orthodox, and heterodox economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 279-302, December.
  18. Benjamin F. Jones, 2010. "Age and Great Invention," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 1-14, February.
  19. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2012. "Heterodox United vs. Mainstream City? Sketching a Framework for Interested Pluralism in Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 1035-1058, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uto:cesmep:201702. 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: (Piero Cavaleri)

or (Marina Grazioli)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.