|
on Post Keynesian Economics |
| By: | Rod O'Donnell (Department of Economics, Macquarie University) |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates Keynes’s writings in the 1920s and 30s to uncover his views on the writing of economics, especially the writing of innovative or path-breaking works. His ideas were mainly presented in comments on other economists (particularly Marshall, Jevons and Malthus), and in reflections on his own experiences (chiefly in his 1932-33 lectures and a 1934 draft preface to the General Theory). These ideas are converted into five underlying principles, the implications of which are discussed in terms of their impact on the clarity and interpretation of his writings and of their relevance to all writings in economics. |
| Date: | 2004–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mac:wpaper:0413&r=pke |
| By: | Rémy Herrera (Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne) |
| Abstract: | This article is to be published in the May 2006 issue of the Monthly Review. Nowadays, neoclassical economics' domination of development theory is on par with that of high finance's neoliberal power over development policies. There are important complementarities between these two forms of ideological domination which are mutually reinforcing and interdependent. Thus, it is not only the absence of a scientific basis and the logical inconsistencies that disqualify these approaches, but the ideological function and antisocial project that their methodologies and conclusions support in the service of world capital. |
| Keywords: | Development, neo-classical economics, neo-liberalism, crisis, heterodoxies. |
| JEL: | A12 B24 B41 F20 N10 O11 |
| Date: | 2006–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mse:wpsorb:r06031&r=pke |
| By: | Avdagic, Sabina; Rhodes, Martin; Visser, Jelle |
| Abstract: | This paper provides the scientific framework for the NEWGOV project Distributive Politics, Learning and Reform. In Part I, we establish our own definition and conceptualization of social pacts. We distinguish four types of pacts with different scope and depth: shadow pacts, headline pacts, coordinated wage setting, and embedded pacts akin to neocorporatist concertation. Part II is concerned with institutional formation, i.e. how such social pacts come into existence. We outline some standard functionalist accounts of institutional emergence, and critically examine them before proposing an alternative bargaining model. Part III is concerned with institutional development, i.e. what determines the continuation and institutionalization of social pacts or their de-institutionalization and demise. Based on the taxonomy of social pacts presented in Part I, we define two alternative evolutionary paths for social pacts (institutionalization and de-institutionalization), and identify three types of trajectory along which social pacts develop (repetition vs. abandonment; integration vs. disintegration; and expansion vs. reduction). We then outline four alternative mechanisms that may potentially drive the institutionalization or de-institutionalization of pacts. Grounded in the four major approaches for analysing institutions, i.e. the functionalist, utilitarian, normative, and power-distributional perspectives, this section proposes four groups of hypotheses to be evaluated in our empirical research. |
| Keywords: | comparative public policy; political economy; sociological institutionalism; corporatism; policy learning; policy networks; organization theory; interest intermediation |
| Date: | 2005–09–19 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:erp:eurogo:p0008&r=pke |
| By: | Hansson, Gustav (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University) |
| Abstract: | The use of institutional measures in empirical work is widespread, but the question of what these measures actually capture and how they are constructed is something that is not given enough attention. Institutions and their measures are therefore like a “black box of goodies”: Something that we do not know much about but at the same time is given a very prominent role in explaining economic development. This paper is an attempt to deepen our understanding of institutional measures by critically examining four measures that have been given a prominent role in the recent literature on economic development. <p> |
| Keywords: | Institutions; Measurement; Methodology |
| JEL: | B40 C82 |
| Date: | 2006–04–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0206&r=pke |
| By: | Robert A. Blecker (Department of Economics, American University) |
| Date: | 2006–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:amu:wpaper:0506&r=pke |