Search

The article focuses on classical economics. Topics include that the neoclassical mathematical theory of value culminated in Kenneth Arrow and Gerard Debreu's model characterizes the static general equilibrium state of an economy; and that the principle of individual utility maximization has no interesting implication for aggregate market demand.

Microeconomics requires a new grounding or formulation that can account for a broader range of socioeconomic behavior than neoclassical economics does. The core of the neoclassical economics research program—the theory of rational choice—has offered insights into the determination of socioeconomic behavior. But other elements need to be integrated into a coherent microeconomic perspective. We introduce such a perspective in which neoclassical economics becomes a special case. This advances our understanding of the determinants of behavior in a coherent and integrated manner. This perspective may form the foundation of an evolutionary and institutional perspective on socioeconomic systems. This has practical value in designing strategy and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This comment shows that Walras, the central figure among the Neoclassical school founders, describes a comprehensive theory of production, capital and money; hence, Nicholas's main claims that "the Neoclassical approach has a fundamentally flawed view of the determination of commodity prices because it conceives of them as being formed in the first instance in the process of exchange abstracting, in the sense of ignoring, production and money" are not based on Walras's theory, and they are unfounded and incorrect. Nicholas accepts the erroneous method of post-Walras authors, namely, when they discuss Walras's approach, the economy is presented either through the exchange economy or through the production economy; moreover, these representations differ from his original model and are incomplete. The result is that these two different theories, post-Walras authors' theory and Walras's original theory, have been identified with each other; and these terms are used interchangeably as if they are not any different from each other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The thesis analyzes the neoclassic price theory within the framework of value and price theory based on Marx's labor theory of value, and then illustrates the position, essence, and defects of neoclassic price theory. Moreover, it illustrates that scientific market price theory should be established on the basis of Marx's labor theory of value, which overcomes the defects of neoclassic price theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In his monumental masterpiece, A Treatise on Human Nature, which explains the methodology of human reasoning concerning matters of fact and describes the roles that passions and morals play in it, Hume arrives at an enormously interesting maxim: An academic controversy cannot continue for long unless the disputants assign different meanings to the major terms employed in the debate. This theory has been applied in this paper to examine the behavioural criticisms about Homo Economicus (HE), the pivotal perception in the neoclassical microeconomic model. To achieve this objective, the paper discusses the origin and evolution of the concept, reviews behavioural criticisms, summarises the main tenets of Hume's philosophy of human knowledge and finally examines the behavioural opinions from Hume's perspective. The paper concludes that Hume's theory convincingly explains the reason why the HE controversy is continuing for over half century- a fact that both the mainstream and behavioural economists are ignoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in experimental economics has cogently challenged the fundamental precept of neoclassical economics that economic agents optimize. The last two decades have seen elaboration of boundedly rational models that try to move away from the optimization approach, in ways consistent with experimental findings. Nonetheless, the collection of alternative models has made little headway supplanting the dominant paradigm. We delineate key ways in which neoclassical microeconomics holds continuing and compelling advantages over bounded-rationality models, and suggest, via a few examples, the sorts of further, difficult pushes that would be needed to redress this state of affairs. Closer collaboration between theoretic modeling and experiments is clearly seen to be necessary. (JEL B40, C72, C90, D01, D21) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article seeks to focus attention on Neoclassical price theory, as one of the two problematic foundations of modern mainstream economics-the other being the theory of distribution. After outlining what is understood to be Neoclassical price theory and noting the various criticisms which it has been subject to from both within and without the school, the article proceeds to argue that its major flaws need to be understood as stemming from how it conceives of the formation of prices in the first instance. Specifically, the article argues that the basic problem with the Neoclassical theory of price is that it abstracts from both production and money in the first instance, such that when these are eventually brought back into the explanation of price it is done so in an inessential manner; one where production and money have no bearing on the findings of the analysis of price which excluded them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT The notion of frictional unemployment failed to grow into a full-fledged theory in the writings of Beveridge, Pigou and Hicks, as these economists were unwilling and/or unable to go beyond the then-prevailing Marshallian approach. Here, first we make explicit the trade organization assumptions underpinning Marshall's equilibrium theory. Next we examine Beveridge's, Pigou's and Hicks' early works on wages and unemployment. Finally, we look at the seminal papers that paved the way for search literature: McCall, Lucas and Prescott, Mortensen and Pissarides. We show that they succeed in providing an unemployment result, because they indeed depart from the Marshallian trade organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the authors discuss the different views on slack resources in health care organizations. It presents the definition of slack and reveals the links between performance and slack resources. It discusses the perspective of organizational slack in neoclassical microeconomic tradition and presents the neoclassical view of efficiency in industrial organization (IO) economics. It discloses the benefits and conditions of promoting slack in the perspective of organizational sociologists.

This paper investigates the origin and evolution of the concept of the industrial district. The idea of industrial district is quite widespread in modern industrial economics and in business studies, with a variety of meanings and typologies. Indeed the real original conceptualisation dates back to Alfred Marshall and the economists of the so-called Cambridge school. Quite often the concept of industrial district is considered as synonymous with agglomeration, localisation and clustering. But, according to the meaning given originally by Marshall, these processes of industry `territorialisation' are quite different from the more `compound localisation' that is the Marshallian industrial district. Therefore, the aim of our contribution is focused on disentangling its original meaning from other subsequent interpretations, referring particularly to the debate on this subject that arose among the economists of the Cambridge School. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to motivate a microeconomic model of consumption in which there is uncertainty that is not resolved ex post regarding the moral context of price changes. We show that neoclassical microeconomic theory can yield a result in which expected utility falls when a consumer who is sufficiently concerned for the uncertain moral context of production is faced with a falling price. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Throughout much of the legal community, the term "economics" evokes memories of undergraduate micro- and macroeconomic courses. At most American colleges and universities, these courses focus almost exclusively on neoclassical economic theory,' which forms the foundation of what is thought of as mainstream economics in the United States. Therefore, it also should not be surprising that law professors and others who come from backgrounds that have been marginalized and oppressed by the policy instruments constructed using neoclassical economic theory, both generally and as it has infiltrated the law and legal thinking, would devote greater effort to interrogating mainstream economic theory, than those who benefit from the ideologically determined distributions of assets, resources, and opportunities that this system achieves.

The article focuses on economic analysis oriented towards understanding the workings of economies. Attempts have been made to promote an evolutionary approach towards economics. Basic questions related to the coordination of economic activity depend upon a central authority guiding and commanding action. The questions concerned with the processes driving economic progress, pulls the theorizing of economics, towards an evolutionary orientation. The question of economic development has waxed and waned in centrality to the discipline, as has the importance of evolutionary theorizing. It became the standard view that microeconomic theory was about equilibrium conditions. Many neoclassical economists seem to hold the view that an evolutionary theory of firm and industry behavior and a neoclassical one really amount to the same thing. The problem of variety is that for the selection process to arrive at a neoclassical destination, the existing firms must represent a wide enough variety of strategies and actions that the profit-maximizing neoclassical behavior is represented.

The resource-based view can be positioned relative to at least three theoretical traditions: SCP-based theories of industry determines of firm performance, new-classical microeconomics, and evolutionary economics. In the 1991 article, only the first of these ways of positioning the resource-based view is explored. This article briefly discusses some of the implications of positioning the resource-based view relative to these other two literatures; it also discusses some of the empirical implication of each of these different resource-based theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on John Maynard Keynes's aggregate supply and expected demand analysis. The expected demand function is the entrepreneurs' expectation of the expenditure function. Keynes's supply and expected demand analysis is the extension to the system as a whole of the theory of the competitive firm. Keynes accepts the Marshallian theory of the competitive firm and confines himself to some qualifications related to the concept of user cost. However, in order to be able to aggregate, he introduces the notions of aggregate supply function and aggregate expected demand (proceeds) function for the individual firm. Given the price expectations of the firms, the 'daily' equilibrium level of employment for the whole economy can be derived by simply adding up the individual firms' equilibrium levels of employment. However, Keynes obtains the same result in terms of aggregate supply and expected demand functions for the whole economy.

This article analyzes the theories of economic growth. The authors argued that there is a sharp inconsistency between the two bodies of research surveyed in this article, the macro growth literature and the macro literature on technological change, which calls into question the basic tenets of neoclassical theory. In the first section, the authors discuss neoclassical growth theory, and the nature of its inconsistency with the micro studies of technological change. They also consider the apparent attractiveness of the Schumpeterian alternative to neoclassical theory. The basic elements of an evolutionary growth theory are discussed in section two. It is proposed that this theory provides the framework for a rigorous and rich analysis of the processes of technical change and dynamic competition, encompassing several of the Schumpeterian ideas. Section three describes a particular evolutionary model and discusses some simulation results. Acceptance of the view that growth is an evolutionary, not a neoclassical, process involves a number of important changes in perspective and interpretation, and these are discussed in the final section.

Both new-classical and Keynesian macroeconomists usually agree that the price level and real output tend to move in the same direction. By standing on this widely accepted fact the economist can see macroeconomics from an original angle, even though two schools of thought disagree on causes of this pro-cyclicality and on whether activist fiscal and monetary policies are justified. According to some new-classicals, real output and the price level tend to move in the same direction, because producers do not initially know whether an increase in prices they observe in their own market is relative and real, or only a nominal increase. By contrast, the traditional Keynesian theory assumes that, when an economy is depressed, there are prices or wages stuck at disequilibrium levels and thus involuntary unemployment. An increase in aggregate demand tends to correct these inefficiencies and thereby increases welfare as well as real output. There are bottlenecks and other limits to price stickiness, so the price level rises when real output increases.

Economist Piero Sraffa's work, by providing a general critique of neoclassical theory, has cleared the ground for unorthodox approaches like that of the post-Keynesian's. It also offers a better basis for building a theory of a production system generating an economic surplus. Sraffa's 1960 book, "Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities," has been cited as playing a decisive role in the development of post-Keynesian theory. Since the precise nature of Sraffa's contribution to the reconstruction of economic theory along non-neoclassical lines is not always clearly specified, and the scope and conceptual framework of his analysis have remained somewhat obscure. this essay will attempt to place Sraffa!s work in proper perspective in relation to post-Keynesian theory. It will cover, among other topics, the development of Sraffa's analysis the distinction between his classical representation of the economic process, based on the notion of a surplus, and the neoclassical vision, and sonic specific results of his analysis-in particular, the distinction between basic and nonbasic commodities and the standard system.

The article focuses on economist Eugen von Bohtn-Bawerk's "marginal pairs" theory of price. The key differences between the Austrian and neoclassical methods can easily be illustrated using Bohm-Bawerk's theory. Students often find Bohm-Bawerk's 20-page discussion to be clear, if a bit wordy, and more intuitive than the curves of neoclassical microeconomic theory. Whatever the advantages of symbolic mathematics for describing equilibrium states, it is useless for establishing a cause-effect relationship and for understanding the process by which individuals make or form prices. Bohm-Bawerk's and later Austrians' preferences for verbal reasoning is not simply a refusal to be dragged into the modem age but follows from fundamental beliefs about the purpose and nature of economics. In practice, instructors and authors often pay little attention to Bohm-Bawerk's theory of price. Time is pressing in a general-coverage history of economic thought course, and despite its recent revival, some teachers are not interested in the Austrian school.

Irving Fisher is rightly thought of as one of the pioneers of neoclassical economics. Fisher's contributions in Modern behavioral economics is characterized by three features. First, rational choice is used as a starting point for developing theories of economic decision-making and market equilibria. Second, actual individual behavior is analyzed using a variety of data-collection methods. Third, these observations of human behavior, along with some lessons from other social scientists are used to explain and understand the ways in which the rational theories fail to describe the world we live in. Two of Fisher's favorite topics, time preference and money illusion, illustrate how he utilizes this approach. In his book "The Theory of Interest," Fisher develops what is still thought of as the modern theory of intertemporal choice. The famous Fisher diagram is still an essential element of any course on microeconomics, macroeconomics, or finance. The outcome of this analysis is that at the margin everyone has the same preferences for intertemporal substitution.