Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uwe/wpaper/1006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What is this thing called ‘heterodox economics’?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Mearman

    (Department of Economics, University of the West of England)

Abstract
This paper conducts a type of meta-analysis of a sample of commentaries on heterodox economics, also drawing on biological literature and other treatments of classification. The paper contrasts what might be called a ‘classical’ category with a ‘modern’ category and then analyses treatments of HE as a category. It is argued that though HE appears to be a complex object – and that authors recognise this – HE as a category is most often classical even though modern would appear more appropriate. That this is the case may reflect choices of levels of abstraction which in turn reflect instrumental purposes of influencing the reality of Economics. While arguments for the rejection of HE as a category are too strong, current treatments of HE are perhaps not careful enough in recognising its provisional and fluid nature. The paper considers these issues in turn.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Mearman, 2010. "What is this thing called ‘heterodox economics’?," Working Papers 1006, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwe:wpaper:1006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carecon.org.uk/DPs/1006.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian Loasby, 2003. "Closed models and open systems," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 285-306.
    2. Paul Davidson, 2007. "Setting the Record Straight on “a History of Post Keynesian Economics”," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Interpreting Keynes for the 21st Century, chapter 19, pages 227-253, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Jason Potts, 2000. "The New Evolutionary Microeconomics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2258.
    4. D. Meador, 2009. "Comment on “What is Heterodox Economics? Conversations with Historians of Economic Thought”," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 38(1), pages 71-73, April.
    5. Andy Denis, 2013. "Pluralism in economics education," Chapters, in: Jesper Jespersen & Mogens Ove Madsen (ed.), Teaching Post Keynesian Economics, chapter 5, pages 88-105, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Davis, John B, 1999. "Common Sense: A Middle Way between Formalism and Post-Structuralism?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(4), pages 503-515, July.
    7. Philip Arestis, 1992. "The Post-Keynesian Approach to Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16.
    8. Alan Freeman, 2009. "The Economists of Tomorrow: the Case for a Pluralist Subject Benchmark Statement for Economics," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 23-40.
    9. Freeman, Alan, 2009. "The Economists of Tomorrow," MPRA Paper 15691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. David Dequech, 2007. "Neoclassical, mainstream, orthodox, and heterodox economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 279-302.
    11. Sheila C. Dow, 2012. "Beyond Dualism," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Foundations for New Economic Thinking, chapter 4, pages 52-71, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Wynne Godley & Anwar Shaikh, 2012. "An Important Inconsistency at the Heart of the Standard Macroeconomic Model," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Marc Lavoie & Gennaro Zezza (ed.), The Stock-Flow Consistent Approach, chapter 3, pages 65-80, Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Marc Lavoie, 1992. "Foundations of Post-Keynesian Economic Analysis," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 275.
    14. Andrew Mearman, 2009. "Who do heterodox economists think they are?," Working Papers 0915, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    15. Backhouse, Roger E., 2000. "Progress in Heterodox Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 149-155, June.
    16. D. Meador, 2009. "Comment on “What is Heterodox Economics? Conversations with Historians of Economic Thought”," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 71-73, January.
    17. J. E. King, 2002. "A History of Post Keynesian Economics since 1936," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2135.
    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. Thornton, Tim B, 2011. "The economics curriculum in Australian Universities 1980 to 2011," MPRA Paper 39321, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Robert Garnett & Andrew Mearman, 2011. "Contending Perspectives, Twenty Years On: What Have Our Students Learned?," Working Papers 201104, Texas Christian University, Department of Economics.
    2. Eduardo Fernández-Huerga & Ana Pardo & Ana Salvador, 2023. "Compatibility and complementarity between institutional and post-Keynesian economics: a literature review with a particular focus on methodology," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 40(2), pages 413-443, July.
    3. Andy Denis, 2013. "Pluralism in economics education," Chapters, in: Jesper Jespersen & Mogens Ove Madsen (ed.), Teaching Post Keynesian Economics, chapter 5, pages 88-105, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Katarzyna Gruszka & Annika Scharbert & Michael Soder, 2016. "Changing the world one student at a time? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics Papers ieep7, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    5. Freeman, Alan, 2011. "Association for Heterodox Economics Submission to UK Science and Technology Parliamentary Select Committee on peer review," MPRA Paper 64702, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Mar 2011.
    6. Gruszka, Katarzyna & Scharbert, Annika Regine & Soder, Michael, 2017. "Leaving the mainstream behind? Uncovering subjective understandings of economics instructors' roles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 485-498.
    7. Silvano Cincotti & Wolfram Elsner & Nathalie Lazaric & Anastasia Nesvetailova & Engelbert Stockhammer, 2020. "Towards an evolutionary political economy. Editorial to the inaugural issue of the Review of Evolutionary Political Economy REPE," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-12, May.
    8. Eckhard Hein, 2017. "Post-Keynesian macroeconomics since the mid 1990s: main developments," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 14(2), pages 131-172, September.
    9. Engelbert Stockhammer, 2008. "Is The Nairu Theory A Monetarist, New Keynesian, Post Keynesian Or A Marxist Theory?," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 479-510, July.
    10. Robert F. Garnett & Jack Reardon, 2011. "Pluralism in Economics Education," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Pluralist economics curricula: do they work; and how would we know?," Working Papers 20121203, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    12. Robert Garnett & John Reardon, 2011. "Big Think: A Model for Critical Inquiry in Economics Courses," Working Papers 201102, Texas Christian University, Department of Economics.
    13. Antonio Carlos Macedo e Silva & Cláudio Hamílton dos Santos, 2008. "Peering over the edge of the short period? The Keynesian Roots of Stock-Flow Consistent Macroeconomic Models," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807151456380, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    14. Alexander Dow & Sheila Dow & Alan Hutton, 1997. "The Scottish Political Economy Tradition and Modern Economics," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 44(4), pages 368-383, September.
    15. Andrew Mearman & Sebastian Berger & Danielle Guizzo, 2016. "Curriculum reform in UK economics: a critique," Working Papers 20161611, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    16. Engelbert Stockhammer & Ozlem Onaran, 2013. "Wage-led growth: theory, evidence, policy," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 61-78, January.
    17. Félix-Fernando Muñoz & María-Isabel Encinar, 2019. "Some elements for a definition of an evolutionary efficiency criterion," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 919-937, July.
    18. Justus Haucap & Tobias Thomas & Gert G. Wagner, 2015. "Zu wenig Einfluss des ökonomischen Sachverstands? Empirische Befunde zum Einfluss von Ökonomen und anderen Wissenschaftlern auf die Wirtschaftspolitik," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1449, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Justus Haucap, 2020. "Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Politikberatung in Deutschland: Stärken, Schwächen, Optimierungspotenzial," Springer Books, in: Dirk Loerwald (ed.), Ökonomische Erkenntnisse verständlich vermitteln, pages 45-78, Springer.
    20. Félix-Fernando Muñoz & María-Isabel Encinar, 2015. "Intentionality and the Emergence of Complexity: An Analytical Approach," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & John Foster (ed.), The Evolution of Economic and Innovation Systems, edition 127, pages 171-190, Springer.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    heterodox economics; taxonomy; complexity; meta-analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • B5 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches
    • Z13 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Language; Social and Economic Stratification

    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:uwe:wpaper:1006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: Jo Michell (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seuweuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.