|
on Post Keynesian Economics |
| By: | Laurie Laybourn-Langton (Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), University College London (UCL)); Laurie Macfarlane (Institute for Innovation and Public Policy (IIPP), University College London (UCL)); Michael Jacobs (Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute (SPERI), University of Sheffield) |
| Abstract: | Modern economic history can be roughly split into different eras in which certain sets of ideas dominate politics and policy-making. This paper seeks to understand if a shift in the ‘political economic paradigm’ is currently under way by inspecting the state of debates across a range of economic policy areas. It introduces the concept of ‘orthodox’, ‘modified’ and ‘alternative’ paradigms, corresponding to the status quo, its modification in the face of disruption or changed political goals, and a fundamental break from that status quo, respectively. Its central conclusion is that a significant shift is under way in many economic policy areas in many mainstream economic institutions. This shift has mainly occurred from ‘orthodox’ paradigm approaches – those that might broadly be described as based on neoclassical principles – to a ‘modified’ approach that alters the neoclassical approach in many ways but maintains its fundamental basis. Little to no movement towards what might be described as truly ‘alternative’ paradigm approaches is yet under way, though some mainstream institutions are exhibiting openness to these ideas. As such, an overall paradigm shift away from the dominant neoliberal paradigm is not yet underway. |
| Keywords: | political-economic paradigm; neoliberalism; heterodox economics |
| JEL: | B20 B25 E00 H10 P16 P50 |
| Date: | 2019–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:agz:wpaper:1902&r=all |
| By: | Alexandre Chirat (CRESE, Univ. Bourgogne Franche-Comté) |
| Abstract: | Baumol’s impact on the development of managerial theories of the firm is investigated here through material found in Galbraith’s archives. In 1957 Galbraith published a paper claiming that the impact of macroeconomic policies varies with market structures (competitive versus oligopolistic). This publication prompted Baumol (1958b) to send Galbraith a manuscript dealing extensively with a crucial question of managerial theories of the firm, namely, the “trade-off” between sales and profits. I argue that Baumol’s critiques and Galbraith’s answers largely explain the way Baumol (1958a, 1959) framed his alternative model of the behavior of big corporations. He reasoned in terms of maximization of sales with a profit constraint as their main objective. In return, Business Behavior, Value and Growth fostered the development of Marris’s (1964) and Galbraith’s (1967) theories of the corporation. Contrary to the narrative by Tullock (1978) in which the sales maximization hypothesis has two main branches – Baumol for the one and Galbraith-Marris for the other – I argue here that these branches are at least partially connected. |
| JEL: | B21 B22 D21 D43 |
| Date: | 2020–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:crb:wpaper:2020-07&r=all |
| By: | Jérôme Maucourant (Université Jean-Monnet de Saint-Etienne et Triangle); Bruno Tinel (Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne) |
| Abstract: | How can we characterize the contradictions between the state and the nation, while taking into account the fact that real society is divided into classes? This paper analyses these elements based on the implications of a full employment policy following Kalecki's analysis. We also find that to articulate the notions of state, nation and social classes it is relevant to examine the idea of a dual nature of the state, of which certain elements are found in Marx. Finally, we address the current challenges of economic policy taking into account the trends that tend to erode the role of the state and nations |
| Keywords: | State; nation; social classes; economic policy; full employment; sovereignty |
| JEL: | B51 E12 E62 H50 P34 |
| Date: | 2020–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mse:cesdoc:20019&r=all |
| By: | Khalid Aada (University of Texas Rio Grande Valley) |
| Abstract: | Being a teacher implies enjoying the stages that students have to go through in order to learn; provide an environment conducive to learning; have an academic preparation to be successful. At various points in this process, unlearning is needed to relearn and make sense of a new experience. Being a teacher means recognizing that teaching is a transformative process for both students and teachers. The teaching activity can be defined as the set of actions, carried out inside and outside the classroom, aimed to promoting student learning in relation to the objectives and competencies designed in a planning and a specific institutional context. This leads us to reflect on the importance of developing a framework, as realistic as possible, of the methodology, objectives, content, assessment criteria and activities that are intended to be carried out with the students throughout the school year. But how far can we delimit the dimensions of this reflection? Why is reflection needed? what does the reflection represent for a teacher? Are we talking about an action, stage or a whole process? Why is it important to reflect on the act of teaching? What happens when a teacher begins to think and act not like a technical expert, but like a thoughtful professional? What does reflection in the teaching-learning process represent? Why does the professor need to reflect, invent, and differentiate? The main purpose of this work is to present a pedagogical tool that could help to see and understand the teaching-learning process beyond a simple interaction between the professor and his students, and thus to contribute to the improvement of the study planning. In this article, readers and teachers interested and passionate in this field of education will focus their attention to the importance and the need of being a professional reflexive not only in a narrow perspective but at a global scope, including the way how students learn from the cognitive dimension, especially those who need more assistance. Is it a complex process? Yes, but to reach that deep understanding of what is happening will have the benefit to take the teaching-learning vision from practice dimension to a significative purpose, and would complement any didactic training that teachers perform to make practical decisions, allowing them to reach the established objectives. |
| Keywords: | Educational practice, Professional reflective, Reflection, Reflective teaching, Self-reflection |
| JEL: | I29 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sek:iacpro:11113225&r=all |
| By: | Bruno Dallago; Sara Casagrande |
| Date: | 2020 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:trn:utwprg:2020/4&r=all |