Thursday , February 21 2019
Home / Post-Keynesian / Catalog Of Neoclassical Responses To The Cambridge Capital Controversy

Catalog Of Neoclassical Responses To The Cambridge Capital Controversy

Summary:
This is merely a list and, as usual, off the top of my head. Paul A. Samuelson (1966). A summing up. Quarterly Journal of Economics 80: 568-583. Mark Blaug (1975). The Cambridge revolution: Success of failure? A critical analysis of Cambridge theories of value and distribution. Institute of Economic Affairs. Joseph E. Stiglitz (1974). The Cambridge-Cambridge controversy on the theory of capital: A view from New Haven. Christopher J. Bliss (1975). Capital Theory and the Distribution of Income. Elsevier North-Holland. Avinash Dixit (1977). The accumulation of capital theory. Oxford Economic Papers 29: 1-29. Edwin Burmeister (1980). Capital Theory and Dynamics, Cambridge University Press. Frank Hahn (1982). The neo-Ricardians. Cambridge Journal of Economics 6: 353-374. Andreu Mas Colell

Topics:
Robert Vienneau considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

This is merely a list and, as usual, off the top of my head.

  • Paul A. Samuelson (1966). A summing up. Quarterly Journal of Economics 80: 568-583.
  • Mark Blaug (1975). The Cambridge revolution: Success of failure? A critical analysis of Cambridge theories of value and distribution. Institute of Economic Affairs.
  • Joseph E. Stiglitz (1974). The Cambridge-Cambridge controversy on the theory of capital: A view from New Haven.
  • Christopher J. Bliss (1975). Capital Theory and the Distribution of Income. Elsevier North-Holland.
  • Avinash Dixit (1977). The accumulation of capital theory. Oxford Economic Papers 29: 1-29.
  • Edwin Burmeister (1980). Capital Theory and Dynamics, Cambridge University Press.
  • Frank Hahn (1982). The neo-Ricardians. Cambridge Journal of Economics 6: 353-374.
  • Andreu Mas Colell (1989). Capital theory paradoxes: Anything goes. In Joan Robinson and Modern Economic Theory (ed. by G. R. Feiwel), Macmillan.
  • Mario Ferretti (2004). The neo-Ricardian critique: An anniversary assessment.
  • Gaetano Bloise and Pietro Reichlin (2005). An obtrusive remark on capital and comparative statics.
  • Michael Mandler (). Sraffian economics (new developments). In New Palgrave, 2nd edition.

I could have cited many more references from Burmeister, Mandler, or Samuelson. I do not know if the last two were published as anything more than working papers. As far as I am concerned, most mainstream economists also ignore the neoclassical side of the CCC.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *