To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Neoclassical economic theory.
Journal articles on the topic 'Neoclassical economic theory'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Neoclassical economic theory.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Samuels, W. "Thorstein Veblen as Economic Theorist." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 7 (July 20, 2007): 99–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-7-99-117.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers the Veblen’s legacy from the point of view of its theoretical status. In this connection the author investigates the nature of theory as such, analyzes neoclassical school as theory, compares Veblen’s ideas with neoclassical conceptions, in particular showing the influence of these ideas on F. Knight. The article displays and systematizes the main directions of Veblen’s research and shows that if a certain concept of the theory as such is adopted, then these lines of research should be treated as theories no less than the works of neoclassic economists.
2
Gasanov, E. A., M. A. Gasanov, S. A. Zhironkin, and T. G. Krasota. "NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMIC THEORY: DOMINANT CONCEPTS." Vestnik of Khabarovsk State University of Economics and Law, no. 2(109) (November 28, 2022): 5–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.38161/2618-9526-2022-2-005-013.
Full textAbstract:
Neoclassical economic theory arose in the 70s of the XIX century, which proceeds from the principle of economic liberalism and the principle of free competition. In their research, neoclassicists study the behavior of an economic person and focus on the study of applied practical problems, use quantitative analysis and mathematics. Greater attention is paid to the problems of efficient use of limited economic resources at the microeconomic level. Neoclassical economic theory is characterized by several postulates common to many schools and trends. However, there is a wide range of neoclassical approaches to various problem areas of economic theory.
3
Upravitelev, A. A. "Neoclassical roots of behavioral economics." Journal of the New Economic Association 58, no. 1 (2023): 110–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.31737/22212264_2023_1_110.
Full textAbstract:
Despite the fact that the names of a number of Nobel laureates are associated with behavioral economics, researchers regard this branch of science as an unorthodox, avant-garde research program. This article aims to fill this theoretical gap and link behavioral economics to mainstream of economic thought, as well as to divide behavioral economics into several directions — relative to the initial approaches or theories of neoclassics. In the first row of cases, we collected those approaches of neoclassical economics about economic behavior, in relation to which alternative concepts were proposed by behavioral economics. These neoclassical approaches are rationality, awareness, egoism of behavior. Another series is neoclassical theories, in dialogue with which theories of behavioral economics arose. These are theories of expected utility, game theory, exponential discounted utility, revealed preferences, rational expectations, efficient market. The sequence of development of behavioral economics we presented connects it, a once heterodox branch of science with the mainstream economic thought. The article can serve as a guide to the most important areas of research in behavioral economics. This study systematizes scientific knowledge and establishes methodological links within it.
4
Adams, Erin C. "Economics and the civic mission of social studies education: Two critiques of neoclassicism." Citizenship, Social and Economics Education 18, no. 1 (April 2019): 16–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2047173419841915.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the theoretical assumptions underlying K-12 economic curriculum and the consequences of this curriculum for citizenship education and democracy. Specifically, the article discusses scholarship related to the critique of neoclassic economic theory’s role in influencing the Voluntary National Content Standards in Economics and the trickle-down effects into state standards and textbooks. From the literature, the author uncovers two main critiques of neoclassicism: that neoclassic theory is unrealistic and impersonal. Neoclassic theory has enormous consequences for the civic mission of social studies. The author investigates the extent to which neoclassical theory makes for good citizenship and is desirable for a democratic society.
5
Gasanov, E. A. "NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMIC THEORY: ESSENCE AND CHARACTERISTICS." Vestnik of Khabarovsk State University of Economics and Law, no. 3 (107) (December 29, 2021): 5–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.38161/2618-9526-2021-3-05-10.
Full textAbstract:
Неоклассическая экономическая теория – преобладающее в ХХ столетии направление экономи-ческой науки. Она вышла из классической политической экономии. Изучение механизма функционирова-ния рыночной экономики стало прерогативой неоклассической экономической теории. Сторонники этой теории обращают основное внимание на самостоятельную хозяйственную деятельность отдельных индивидов и выступают за ограничение государственного вмешательства в рыночную экономику. Для этой теории принципы рационального эгоизма и «невидимой руки» стали основой подлинного научного анализа.
6
Styhre, Alexander. "Coping with irrationality in orthodox economic theory." International Journal of Organizational Analysis 24, no. 5 (November 7, 2016): 792–810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-10-2015-0931.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically assess the assumptions regarding human behaviour in orthodox neoclassical economic theory. The orthodox neoclassical economic theory prescribes rational models of human behaviour, but the strictness of the criteria, developed to promote theoretical consistency and conceptual elegance, commonly fails to fully accommodate all of the empirical material. To save the core of the orthodox neoclassical economic theory research program and to neutralize and mute criticism regarding its predictive failures, its proponents engage in expedient theorizing, the expansion of the initial theoretical framework by adding ad hoc hypotheses and/or including additional explanatory factors; in many cases, dismissed as “unnecessary complications” (as in the case of morality and ethics – two conspicuously “non-economic” concepts) in the initial formulation of theoretical propositions of the core theories. Design/methodology/approach The paper reviews a body of heterogeneous literature to introduce and examine the use of expedient theorizing in economic thinking. Findings In the present case, the hyperrationalist axiom regarding the efficacy of calculative practices to maximize individual utility is accompanied by moralist concerns (and, by implication, corrective and disciplinary action) regarding the failure to adhere to such prescriptions. Expedient theorizing, thus, becomes a key mechanism in the political economy of truth that currently grants orthodox neoclassical economic theory significant authority to inform policy-making in substantial ways and considerable prestige. Originality/value The orthodox neoclassical economic theory constitutes the blueprint for policy-making and institutional change, and, therefore, the key economic ideas being the constitutive elements of the contemporary economy demand scholarly attention. The paper thus points at theoretical inconsistencies in the orthodox neoclassical economic theory and introduces the concept of expedient theorizing as its remedy.
7
Gao, Yuan. "A Reflection on Postwar Neoclassical Economics: The Shift from General Equilibrium Theory to the New Microeconomic Theories." Modern China 48, no. 1 (November 20, 2021): 29–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00977004211054844.
Full textAbstract:
The theoretical focus of neoclassical economics experienced a significant change in the 1970s–1980s. General equilibrium theory lost its dominant position in theoretical economic studies, with its role of setting the research agenda taken over by what this article calls the “new microeconomic theories,” principally decision theory, game theory, and mechanism design. Mainstream economists, post-Keynesians, and historians of economic thought each give a different explanation of the hows and whys of that change, but all miss some critical methodological implications. That change, as this article discusses, shows that neoclassical economics has turned from “grand theory” toward “small models” with empirically delimited utility and that the ideology of marketism lacks a valid scientific foundation. This interpretation can help illuminate the deeper dynamics of the postwar development of neoclassical economics and provide insights for a new political economy that can come to grips with political-economic practices that cannot be fully grasped by the neoclassical tradition.
8
Trputec, Zoran, and Nataša Šantić. "The Post-Covid-19 Reality and Economic Theory." Mednarodno inovativno poslovanje = Journal of Innovative Business and Management 12, no. 2 (November 3, 2020): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.32015/jibm.2020.12.2.1.1-12.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines interconnectedness between Covid-19 and six nested subsystems of our planet: people, economy, society, anthroposphere, biosphere and planetosphere. It argues the complexity inside of them and in their interactions. The main question is what paradigmatic shift related to sustainable development economics did Covid-19 initiate, and what are the changes in paradigmatic manifestations of a post Covid-19 sustainable economic theory. Through comparison between neoclassical economics together with neoclassical paradigm manifestations, and what should be changed to avoid business as usual and enhance environmental economy, the paper concludes that much of everyday economic intellectual constructs and activities, including dominant economic theory is the part of the present reality that is not sustainable and has to be changed.
9
Hong, A.-Sung. "Performativity of Neoclassical Economic Theory : Economic Liberalization and Economic Growth." Society and Theory 24 (May 31, 2014): 95. http://dx.doi.org/10.17209/st.2014.05.24.95.
Full text
10
Yaghmaian, Behzad, and Reza Ghorashi. "Export Performance and Economic Development: An Empirical Analysis." American Economist 39, no. 2 (October 1995): 37–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/056943459503900204.
Full textAbstract:
This paper challenges the results of the empirical literature in support of the neoclassical theory of export-led growth and provides a theoretical and empirical alternative. Contrary to the neoclassical theory, we argue that both exports and economic growth are preceded by a long and complex process of structural change and economic development. A cross-section regression analysis is applied to test the neoclassical hypothesis that exports lead to superior economic performance (higher growth of output), and our alternative thesis. The regression results strongly confirm our alternative formulation of exports and economic growth while failing to support the neoclassical thesis.
11
Jakimowicz, A. "Path Dependence in Neoclassical Economic Growth Theory." Acta Physica Polonica A 127, no. 3a (March 2015): A—86—A—94. http://dx.doi.org/10.12693/aphyspola.127.a-86.
Full text
12
Zafirovski, Milan. "Sociological dimensions in classical/neoclassical economics: Conceptions of social economics and economic sociology." Social Science Information 53, no. 1 (March 2014): 76–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018413509909.
Full textAbstract:
This article posits that traditional economics contains relevant sociological dimensions and that these consist primarily of conceptions and elements of social economics or economic sociology. On this premise, it explores these sociological dimensions in the form of conceptions and elements of social economics and/or economic sociology in classical political economy and neoclassical economics. The article identifies explicit conceptions of social economics such as the proposal for social economy and the idea of economic sociology as well as its implicit versions, including its implications in ‘purest’ economic theory. Alternatively, the article finds no important sociological dimensions in the form of rational choice theory, i.e. the ‘economics of society’, in classical and neoclassical economic science. The article reconsiders economics and sociology in their shared elements or complementary relations as ‘sister’ social sciences.
13
Ji, Xi, and Zhen Luo. "Opening the black box of economic processes: Ecological Economics from its biophysical foundation to a sustainable economic institution." Anthropocene Review 7, no. 3 (July 21, 2020): 231–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2053019620940753.
Full textAbstract:
The roots of Ecological Economics can be found at the very beginning of Classical Economics, where physical wellbeing was the object of research, instead of the allocation of resources. Although Neoclassical Economics abandoned this objective early on, other efforts to study the biophysical foundations of the economic processes persisted and were inherited by modern Ecological economists. The fundamental difference between Ecological Economic theory and Neoclassical Economic theory is that, Ecological economists attempt to open the black box of economic processes with modern scientific tools, while Neoclassical economists expand the black box without interest in the mechanisms inside. However, in the current Ecological Economics framework, the social sphere of discussion is dominated by translated mainstream versions of Ecological Economics, rather than its original biophysical form. In the next stage of its evolution, Ecological Economics must address such inconsistencies to provide institutional insights based on the biophysical foundations of the subject, to fully open the black box of how human society extracts material and energy from the ecosystem, transforms them into physical wealth, and distributes that physical wealth. Also it must provide policy implications on how to carve out a sustainable economic institution.
14
Zhang, Wei-Bin. "An Integration of Neoclassical Growth Theory and Economic Structural Change with Monopolistic Competition Theory." Business and Economic Research 11, no. 2 (April 6, 2021): 145. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ber.v11i2.18380.
Full textAbstract:
Wealth accumulation is a deterministic factor mechanism of national economic growth. Neoclassical growth theory is basically concerned with capital and wealth accumulation in perfectly competitive market. Global markets are characterized by a great variety of markets. Nevertheless, there only a few rigorous models of wealth accumulation with other types of markets within neoclassical growth framework. This study attempts to contribute literature of economic growth by introducing monopolistic competition and monopoly into neoclassical growth theory. The model is based on a few well-established economic theories. The model is constructed within framework of the Solow-Uzawa two-sector neoclassical growth model. The description of to monopolistic competition is influenced by the Dixit-Stiglitz model of monopolistic competition. The modelling of monopoly is based on monopoly theory. We model behavior of the household with Zhang’s utility function and concepts of current income and disposable income. The unique contribution of this research is to integrate these theories in a comprehensive framework. We construct the basic model and then analyze properties of the model. The existence of a unique equilibrium point is identified by simulation. The effects of changes in some parameters comparative static analyses in some parameters.
15
Kirdina-Chandler, S. G. "Economic Theory, Ideology, and Economic Interests." AlterEconomics 19, no. 1 (2022): 71–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.31063/altereconomics/2022.19-1.5.
Full textAbstract:
The social significance of economic theory is widely discussed in Russia and in the world. The role of economic theory depends on the efforts of theoretical economists themselves as well as on the context of its development. Ideology and economic interests are important elements of this context. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine these elements and the relationship between economic theory, ideology and economic interests in Western countries, in China and the USSR by comparing neoclassical economic theory,“political economy with Chinese characteristics”, and political economy developed in the early Soviet period. Methodologically, the study relies on the methods of cross-country analysis, case study and biographical analysis. The study comprises three levels: individual, institutional, and societal. The individual level is represented by individual economists, more specifically, the focus will be made on Nikolai Kondratiev’s views and ideological preferences. The institutional level is represented by communities of economists working within common areas of interest. The societal level means that economic theory, ideology and economic interests are considered at the level of society as a whole. As a result of the study, similar patterns of development of neoclassical economic theory, Soviet political economy, and “political economy with Chinese characteristics” were identified. These similarities can be explained by the role of economic theory in society and the way economic knowledge is organized and functions. It was also shown that a mismatch between the development of economic theory, ideology and economic interests may have a negative impact. It was observed towards individual economists, what is shown in the example of Kondratiev, and specific areas of economic theory development in the period of Soviet political economy.
16
Veblen, T. "The Limitations of Marginal Utility." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 7 (July 20, 2007): 86–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-7-86-98.
Full textAbstract:
The article written by the founder of institutionalism and published in 1909 is translated into Russian for the first time. Veblen criticizes different versions of neoclassical theories of production and consumption, trying to consider human behavior in the wide cultural context. He suggests a methodological alternative to neoclassical theory, rebutting teleological explanations of neoclassics and emphasizing causal relations. Moreover Veblen formulates a theoretical alternative: he develops a theory of institutional evolution and describes how habits, customary modes of thought and conventional judgments influence behavior of businessmen and how the analysis of their scheme of life can contribute to deeper understanding of their economic activity.
17
Texocotitla, Miguel Alvarez, M. David Alvarez-Hernández, and Shaní Eneida Alvarez-Hernández. "Dimensional Analysis in Economics: A Study of the Neoclassical Economic Growth Model." Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 32, no. 2 (July 24, 2019): 123–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0260107919845269.
Full textAbstract:
The fundamental purpose of the present research article is to introduce the basic principles of dimensional analysis in the context of the neoclassical economic theory, in order to apply such principles to the fundamental relations that underlay most models of economic growth. In particular, basic instruments from dimensional analysis are used to evaluate the analytical consistency of the neoclassical economic growth model. The analysis shows that an adjustment to the model is required in such a way that the principle of dimensional homogeneity is satisfied. JEL: A12, C02, C65, O40
18
Zitko, Mislav. "Models, fictions and explanations: A study in historical epistemology of economics." Filozofija i drustvo 24, no. 4 (2013): 84–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/fid1304084z.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines the standard criticism of the neoclassical economic theory that takes mathematical formalism and the practice of modelling as the most problematic aspect of orthodox economics. The aim of the paper is to explore the epistemic properties of models in science (particularly in economics), and to incorporate the insights from the recent debates in the philosophy of science into the framework of historical epistemology of economics. The main claim of this paper is that history is important for understanding how economic models operate and why have they been accepted as legitimate instruments of inquiry in economic theory. However, since modelling practice clearly is not limited to neoclassical economic theory, the difference between economic orthodoxy and heterodoxy has to be explained in a different way. The paper argues that the theory of fiction can provide an important clue inasmuch as the epistemological and political commitments are a part of the story that underpins the modelling practice in economics.
19
Sorokin, A. V. "What use is economic theory? Mainstream as a component of the political economic model." Moscow University Economics Bulletin, no. 6 (November 8, 2022): 42–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.38050/01300105202263.
Full textAbstract:
What use is neoclassical mainstream? Criticism of mainstream practical applicability by heterodoxies is not weakening. But the mainstream is heterogeneous, it includes orthodox neoclassical mainstream (Walras, Keynes, Friedman), the subject — “the wealth of nations”, the method — a mathematically descriptive method without explanations and the Marshallian version — with the same subject and method, but with explanations from the standpoint of individual behavior. The regularities of the objective neoclassical mainstream (demand curve, equality of savings to investments, etc.) are irrefutable, but its practical applicability is limited by the descriptive method. The potential of the mainstream can be revealed if it is re-incorporated into the classical two–factor model “nature-form” (nature according to Smith — “purchasing power”, according to Marx — “value”; form — good, use value), in which the descriptive method is supplemented by an explicative one. This is a classic model at a new level, consistent with genomics (the product is not an “economic cell”, but an “economic DNA molecule”). The model differs from the heterodox “Marxist political economy” in subject matter and method. This is the “new orthodoxy” which can be called “applied political economy”, since it includes analysis, forecasting and application in business practice.
20
Repin, S. S. "Neoclassical and contract economic theory of the firm." Scientific notes of the Russian academy of entrepreneurship 20, no. 4 (January 8, 2022): 31–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.24182/2073-6258-2021-20-4-31-33.
Full text
21
Swanson, Diane L. "Neoclassical Economic Theory, Executive Control, and Organizational Outcomes." Human Relations 49, no. 6 (June 1996): 735–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679604900602.
Full text
22
Misiński, Wojciech. "Why does mainstream economy not explain the causes of contemporary negative socio-economic phenomena?" WSB Journal of Business and Finance 53, no. 1 (February 1, 2019): 92–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/wsbjbf-2019-0010.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article is a continuation and extension of the lecture ‘Causes and effects of incompleteness and non-inclusion of ownership structures of contemporary capital companies’ delivered at the conference in Wrocław in 2017 and published in the Scientific Notebooks of the University of Economics (No. 493). The aim of the article is to answer the question: why the Neoclassical Theory of Markets (Main Current Economics) does not explain the causes of a number of contemporary socio-economic phenomena, in particular, huge price fluctuations, breakdowns of individual markets and as a consequence of economic crises on a global scale? This required a new, different from the neoclassical view of the series of processes and market phenomena occurring in contemporary economies as well as the verification of the Neoclassical Market Theory paradigm constituting the main core of the Mainstream Economics. These include, in particular: 1) theoretical (classical) and real ‘object (s)’ analysis of market transactions; 2) rejection of one-dimensional, neoclassical analysis of exchange processes (transactions), accepting two or even three-dimensional analysis of the exchange process (transaction); 3) analysis of exchange processes (transactions), the ‘subject’ of which are complete, incomplete or partial (and their bundles) property rights; 4) analysis of exchange processes (transactions) by complete and exclusive and incomplete and non-exclusive decision-makers; 5) analysis of exchange processes (transactions), whose ‘subject’ are partial (and their bundles) property rights in relation to virtual (non-material) ‘goods’. Taking into account that the above verification (acceptance of a different from the neoclassical paradigm of market theory) allows to break out of the circle of elegant and logical neoclassical analysis of theoretical, never and nowhere existing markets (exchange processes), and more importantly, the explanatory reasons for a series of negative, contemporary socio-economic phenomena.
23
Dagum, Estela Bee. "Business Cycles and Current Economic Analysis." Studies of Applied Economics 28, no. 3 (March 14, 2021): 577–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/eea.v28i3.4742.
Full textAbstract:
This is a brief introduction to the special issue on “New Developments in Modelling and Estimation of Economic Cycles” . The concept and definition of economic and business cycles are discussed together with two main schools of thought, the Keynesian and the neoclassical. Until the Keynesian revolution in mainstream economics in the wake of the Great Depression, classical and neoclassical explanations were the mainstream explanation of economic cycles; following the Keynesian revolution, neoclassical macroeconomics was largely rejected. There has been some resurgence of neoclassical approaches in the form of real business cycle (RBC) theory. Real business cycle theory is a class of macroeconomic model in which business cycle fluctuations to a large extent can be accounted for by real (in contrast to nominal) shocks. In a broad sense , there have been two ways by which economic and business cycles have been studied, one analyzing complete cycles and the other, studying the behavior of the economic indicators during incomplete phases by comparing current contractions or expansions whith corresponding phases in the past in order to assess current economic conditions. Two different methodologies have been applied for current economic analysis, the parametric one, that makes use of filters based on models, such as ARIMA and State Space models , and the other based on nonparametric digital filtering. Some of the invited papers of this issue deal with this second approach.
24
Krasilnikov, A. "Evolutionary Models in the Theory of Economic Growth." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 1 (January 20, 2007): 66–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-1-66-81.
Full textAbstract:
The role of evolutionary economics in the development of economic growth theory is considered in the article. Different types of evolutionary models are distinguished, analyzed and compared with neoclassical models. Special attention is paid to the treatment of scientific and technological progress, particularly within the framework of the models of technological diffusion.
25
Mukhin, А. А. "THE USE OF COBB-DOUGLAS PRODUCTION FUNCTION IN MODELING PRODUCTION PROCESSES." Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law 30, no. 6 (December 28, 2020): 822–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.35634/2412-9593-2020-30-6-822-829.
Full textAbstract:
Several alternative economic approaches to the study of organization are discussed in the literature: the neoclassical theory, the theory of transaction costs (the theory of specific assets), the theory of incomplete contracts (the theory of property rights), and the Agency theory (the theory of incentives). Recently, there have been approaches at the intersection of Economics and management: resource theory, knowledge theory, strategic theory, entrepreneurial theory; in the framework of sociology: network theory, the theory of resource dependence, the theory of institutional isomorphism, the theory of situational choice, the theory of strategic choice. The article deals with the basic model of neoclassical theory. The advantage of the neoclassical theory is that it emphasizes the role of technology in General and economies of scale in particular as factors that influence the size of production, turnover of organizations. Within the framework of the considered approach, a certain macrostructure is determined that carries out the costs of economic resources: fixed assets, the number of employees that affect the turnover of organizations. The task of rational economic management, which meets the Udmurt Republic, is to determine the forecast of turnover of organizations with the given resources and to calculate the necessary for its value of fixed assets, the number of employees.
26
Vilks, Arnis. "A Set of Axioms for Neoclassical Economics and the Methodological Status of the Equilibrium Concept." Economics and Philosophy 8, no. 1 (April 1992): 51–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266267100000481.
Full textAbstract:
It is widely agreed that the concept of general equilibrium and, in particular, general equilibrium existence proofs play a central role within the neoclassical approach to economic theory. There is much less agreement, however, on the concepts of general equilibrium and of neoclassical economic theory themselves.
27
Zhao, Liuyang. "China’s “Economic Miracle” and the Universal Modernization Model." Modern China 48, no. 1 (November 20, 2021): 53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00977004211054845.
Full textAbstract:
Neoclassical economics relies on highly formalized deductive logic to create an overly simplified picture of economic practices. Its universalized model of modernization assumes that the relationship between state and market is antagonistic. This presumption reduces China’s “economic miracle” to a simple transformation into a market economy and underestimates the role played by the government, making it impossible to construct a theory that considers China’s subjectivity. Studies on China’s economy should focus on its practices, which may appear to be paradoxical if seen only from the perspective of Western neoclassical economics, in order to construct an accurate depiction of the foundations of China’s development experience. Only through such an endeavor will it be possible to incorporate into any new theory of economic modernization the distinctive features of China’s development.
28
Mouck, Tom. "IRVING FISHER AND THE MECHANISTIC CHARACTER OF TWENTIETH CENTURY ACCOUNTING THOUGHT." Accounting Historians Journal 22, no. 2 (December 1, 1995): 43–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/0148-4184.22.2.43.
Full textAbstract:
This paper provides an overview of the influence of Newtonian mechanics on the development of neoclassical economic theory and highlights Fisher's role in the popularization of the resulting mechanical conception of economics. The paper also portrays Fisher's The Nature of Capital and Income — a work which has been aptly characterized as the “first economic theory of accounting” — as the first move toward the colonization of accounting by economics. The result of Fisher's influence has been a paradigmatic linkage between the Newtonian world view of science, neoclassical economics, and mainstream academic accounting thought. The picture that emerges from this linkage is then used as a backdrop against which the emerging challenges to economics-based accounting thought are highlighted.
29
Kirdina-Chandler, Svetlana G. "The System Paradigm and the Prospects for “Institutional Synthesis” in Economic Theory." Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 3 (September 23, 2021): 17–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2021-3(94)-17-32.
Full textAbstract:
The constant adaptation of economic theory to changing practice at certain stages requires a theoretical synthesis, during which various (sometimes competing) research programs are combined in order to develop a more adequate methodology. In orthodox economic theory the two most important syntheses were: the neoclassical synthesis of the 1940–1960s and the new neoclassical synthesis of the 1990s. Both were intradisciplinary in nature. However, the developed toolkit of neoclassical orthodoxy still does not allow the study of the “risks of the system as a whole” and making confident long-term forecasts of economic development. This current situation determines the relevance of research within the framework of the system paradigm, with the help of which such problems can be solved. This paper discusses the characteristics of the system paradigm and analyzes why this paradigm is poorly represented in neoclassical orthodoxy. The paper considers barriers to the spread of the system paradigm, associated with the worldview of modern economists-theoreticians The paper also analyses the methodological prerequisites of neoclassical orthodoxy, the specifics of which also act as a barrier to the development of the system paradigm in economic research. This paper outlines, for the first time, the general shape of the interdisciplinary institutional synthesis, the formation of which has been observed in Russia since the beginning of the 2010s. Its distinctive features are as follows. First, it develops outside economic orthodoxy, in the course of research cooperation between heterodox economists and representatives of social, humanitarian and natural disciplines – that is, it is an interdisciplinary (polydisciplinary) synthesis. Second, the main subject of research within its framework are institutions or, more broadly, meso-level structures that ensure the integrity, reproduction, and development of socio-economic systems. Third, the methodological basis of interdisciplinary cooperation within the framework of the institutional synthesis is provided by a system paradigm and holistic approach which are different from the neoclassical orthodoxy. Some examples of the institutional synthesis presented in Russian economic literature and its practical results are shown. The prospects for the further development of the theoretical interdisciplinary institutional synthesis are outlined.
30
Mejía, Javier. "The Evolution of Economic History since 1950: From Cliometrics to Cliodynamics." Tiempo y economía 2, no. 2 (December 11, 2015): 79–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.21789/24222704.1061.
Full textAbstract:
This paper analyzes the evolution of economic history in the last 65 years. It argues that economic history has followed a path that goes from the strictly use of standard economics applied to economic past (i.e. cliometrics), to a general formal reflection of social history based on more flexible tools (i.e. cliodynamics). While cliometrics was a paradigm based on neoclassical theory and econometric methods, cliodynamics is a research agenda founded in non-neoclassical theoretical frameworks and quantitative methods not based on statistical inference. In that sense, the paper supports the idea that economic history has maintained its relevance in economics literature, despite the decay of particular traditions in the field.
31
Todorov, Vasil. "THE METHODOLOGY OF NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS: A CONTEMPORARY DISCOURSE." Economic Thought journal 67, no. 1 (June 1, 2022): 7–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.56497/etj2267101.
Full textAbstract:
The article presents a summarized characteristics of neoclassical economics methodology, its components, and expressed views. The identified core features of economic methodology are: apriorism; deductivism, a priori deductivism; axiomatic/postulate method; axiomatic-deductive theory building; mathematical formalization; the concept of true theory, typical for neo-classics; instrumentality; theory testing through predictions of its effect, automation, reduction and methodological individualism; ignoring the community and natural environment. Conclusions are made that (1) the leading impact factor for neoclassical economics growth is a priori and axiomatic deductivism in particular (and not methodological individualism, as commonly accepted) and (2) the primary reasons for the development of neoclassical economics in the second half of the 20th century till now, as an instrumental and not an explanatory theory, and its discrepancy with reality, are mainly due to the methodology. A question is raised: what kind of theory – instrumental or explanatory – should be taught in universities and dominate in the expert, macro-management and public space?
32
Lazarenko, Vladyslav, Roman Hulinchuk, and Oleksandr Botsula. "The Role of Behavioral Economics in Providing Sustainable Demand for Eco-Friendly Products." Oblik i finansi, no. 4(94) (2021): 109–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.33146/2307-9878-2021-4(94)-109-114.
Full textAbstract:
Behavioral economics theory, generated by a change in the established stereotypes of thinking of classical economists, examines processes and phenomena, taking into account psychological factors related to the processes of making irrational decisions by individuals. The purpose of the article is to determine the place and role of the behavioral economics theory in the formation of demand for eco-friendly food products, taking into account physiological primary and environmental needs and other cognitive factors that directly impact consumer behavior in a competitive market. The high degree of influence of irrational factors that are not under the control of the individual on the efficiency of the functioning of a business entity in the markets was revealed. The neoclassical economic and behavioral approaches were compared, and the shortcomings of the neoclassical economic theory and the problems that cannot be solved in practice by the neoclassical approach were identified. But these problems can be solved by using the behavioral approach. It was determined that one of the main economic components in environmentally oriented agriculture is the pricing process, or rather the impossibility of determining a reasonable price for food products. This aspect requires an assessment of rational economic indicators and consumers' level of readiness and ability to respond to changes in market conditions. Motivation significantly influences the choice of consumers in the markets. So, this study reveals the issues of the general motivational theory as part of the behavioral economics theory. Based on the assessment of the motivational aspect, the structural-logical motivational model of behavioral economics in ecologically oriented agriculture was formed; it includes cultural, economic, socio-informational factors.
33
Zhang, Wei-Bin. "Monopolies and perfect competition in Solow–Uzawa’s general equilibrium growth model." Russian Journal of Industrial Economics 12, no. 4 (January 3, 2020): 405–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.17073/2072-1633-2019-4-405-415.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to introduce monopolies to neoclassical growth theory. This unique contribution attempts to make neoclassical economic growth theory more realistic in modelling the complexity of economic growth and development with different types of market structures. This study is based on a few well-established economic theories in the literature of economics. We frame the model on basis of the Solow–Uzawa two-sector growth model. The modelling of monopoly is based on well-developed monopoly theory. We model behavior of the household with Zhang’s concept of disposable income and utility function. The model endogenously determines profits of monopolies which are equally distributed among the homogeneous population. We build the model and then identify the existence of an equilibrium point by simulation. We conduct comparative static analyses in some parameters.
34
Domjahn, Thomas. "Late neoclassical economics. The restoration of theoretical humanism in contemporary economic theory." History of Economics Review 66, no. 1 (January 2, 2017): 77–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10370196.2017.1296325.
Full text
35
Zhironkin, S. A., E. A. Gasanov, M. A. Gasanov, and T. G. Krasota. "SPECIFICS OF METHODOLOGY IN THE CLASSICAL AND NEOCLASSICAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY." Vestnik of Khabarovsk State University of Economics and Law, no. 1(111) (March 17, 2023): 21–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.38161/2618-9526-2023-1-021-025.
Full textAbstract:
The classical direction of economic theory is the direction of economic thought, within which the emergence and development of a market system was first scientifically studied. It developed a coherent system of economic categories and laws based on the principle of non-intervention of the state in the market economy and support for competition. This direction is considered revolutionary, since its results are relevant at the present time. The neoclassical direction explores the behavior of the co-called economic man, who seeks to maximize income and minimize costs. The main categories of analysis are limiting values. Representatives of the neoclassical direction developed the theory of unit productivity, equilibrium theory, economic theory of welfare, theory of rational expectations and others.
36
Schilirò, Daniele. "Economic Decisions and Simon’s Notion of Bounded Rationality." International Business Research 11, no. 7 (June 15, 2018): 64. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v11n7p64.
Full textAbstract:
Decision making in economics has been always intertwined with the concept of rationality. However, neoclassical economic literature has been dominated by a specific notion of rationality, namely, perfect rationality, characterized by the assumption of consistency and by the maximization hypothesis. Herbert Simon, in his long research activity, questioned this concept of perfect or global rationality, suggesting a different vision, based on empirical evidence and regarding an individual’s choices. He challenged the neoclassical theory of global rationality, suggesting his notion of bounded rationality, a satisficing (instead of optimizing) behavior, and the relevance of procedural rationality to understand the process of thought of decision makers.Thus, this paper focuses on Simon’s notion of bounded rationality, since bounded rationality remains the hallmark of his theoretical contribution. First, the paper examines the economic decision process in the neoclassical theory and Simon’s notion of bounded rationality. Then, it analyzes in depth Simon’s behavioral model of rational choice, underlining the relevance of satisficing behavior and procedural rationality. Finally, it suggests an assessment of the concept of bounded rationality.
37
Nesterenko, O., and M. Zdvizova. "Behavioral Economic Theory: a Methodological Breakthrough or Extension of the Boundaries of Dominant Orthodoxy?" Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Economics, no. 206 (2019): 28–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/1728-2667.2019/206-5/4.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the analysis of the place of behavioral approach in the structure of modern economic study. The evolution of views on the essence of economic behavior of individuals is desc ribed and the peculiarities of approaches to its definition of different economic schools are analyzed. The comparative analysis of behavioral and neoclassical approaches is presented; the peculiarity of the used method is the presentation of the neoclassical direction not in the aggregate, but as two main branches – cardinal and ordinal, which allowed for a more detailed analysis. The analysis revealed differences and some similarity of these directions of research. According to the findings, it is concluded that the behavioral approach is not the complete opposite of the neoclassical, but has a significant number of features close to the ideas of ordinary people, so it can be considered as a natural continuation of established ideas deepened through the use of an interdisciplinary approach. The article also outlines possible options for the development of neoclassical and behavioral approaches and the current issues for further research.
38
Deller, Steven C., Brian W. Gould, and Bruce Jones. "Agriculture and Rural Economic Growth." Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 35, no. 3 (December 2003): 517–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s107407080002825x.
Full textAbstract:
The role of farm dependency and size on rural economic growth is examined with data from 2,240 nonmetropolitan U.S. counties for the period 1990–1995. A simple neoclassical model of regional economic growth is set forth with a central question relating to the role of agriculture on rural economic convergence. Traditional neoclassical theory predicts that poor rural areas should grow proportionally faster than rich areas. As interpreted in the academic literature and popular press, a preponderance of small family farms should enhance growth. Results suggest that a higher level of local dependence on production agriculture could lower growth rates.
39
Cesaratto, S. "Critical survey. Savings and economic growth in neoclassical theory." Cambridge Journal of Economics 23, no. 6 (November 1, 1999): 771–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cje/23.6.771.
Full text
40
Shastitko, A. "Neoclassical Economic Theory: a Critical Analysis of the Assumptions." World Economy and International Relations, no. 10 (1995): 18–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-1995-10-18-31.
Full text
41
Cvetanović, Slobodan, and Igor Novaković. "COMMERCALIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE INTO INNOVATION IN THEORY OF ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT." Knowledge International Journal 33, no. 1 (August 30, 2019): 15–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij3301015c.
Full textAbstract:
Theoretical explications of the category of economic development imply the application of research methods that touch not only the economic but also the numerous political, demographic, ethical and environmental dimensions of development. Primarily because of this fact, theoretical explications of economic development can be very imprecise in form and sometimes of a very extensive nature, despite the fact that a descriptive method in the study of particular economic phenomena can significantly replace analytical precision. In any case, logical consistency in qualifying the phenomena characteristic of the theoretical explication of economic development plays an extremely important role and importance. If the content of the theory of economic development is understood in this way, it can also be interpreted as its effort to determine the conditions conducive to achieving a high rate of economic growth over a long period. This is why economic development theorists use a far broader and more diverse analytical ways in their research compared to researchers interested solely in economic growth issues.In addition to standard factors of production (land, labor and capital), neoclassical theory of economic growth also recognized production factors of intangible character in the form of residuals, that is, innovations understood in the broadest sense of the word. This fact can be marked as a key change in economic science related to economic development research. However, a major drawback of the neoclassical theory of economic development is the neglect of explaining the drivers of innovation as a key factor in economic growth. Relying, at the same time, on the dominant linear model of innovation, neoclassical theory states that knowledge commercialized into innovation is by far the most significant driver of economic growth. However, neoclassical models assume that innovations occur spontaneously and that they represent a logical response to market stimuli, that is, they possess traits of the public good, which was basically the greatest weakness of this theoretical direction.Endogenous growth models in conceptual terms have succeeded in overcoming the stagnant neoclassical economic theory theorem that economic growth, in the absence of knowledge valorized in innovation, is a time-limited process. The key drivers of knowledge in new theories of economic growth and development are endogenous and crucial in the process of creating new value. They account for the manifestation of external effects, that is, they explain the possibility of declining returns on production factors at the aggregate level due to the unlimited possibilities of commercialization of knowledge into innovation.
42
Fenin, Cyril V. "The origin and development of economic hermeneutics inside Soviet Marxism and neoclassical synthesis." Izvestiya of Saratov University. Economics. Management. Law 23, no. 1 (February 21, 2023): 4–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1994-2540-2023-23-1-4-9.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction. This article is an analysis of the factors of the emergence and development of economic hermeneutics. The stereotypical ideas about the total ideological unification of political economy in the USSR during the period of Soviet Marxism dominance and the ideological neutrality of neoclassical synthesis, the mainstream of Western economic science, are being critically rethought. Theoretical analysis. It is shown that Soviet political economy is a very interesting complex special case of the economic knowledge development, which was subject to specific requirements from the state apparatus (power structures). The conditions for the genesis of economic hermeneutics in the West within the framework of the neo-Austrian school of economics as a possible reaction to the dogmatism of the neoclassical mainstream are briefly considered. The general reasons for the conservatism of the scientific environment are investigated. An assumption is made about the presence of a number of similar features between Marxism and the neoclassical theory. Results. It has been established that the dominance of Marxism in the USSR and the formal neoclassical synthesis in the USA made it possible to form an environment that subsequently led to a new scientific direction – economic hermeneutics. Moreover, the process of the emergence of a new scientific direction in the depths of this conservative economic paradigm was quite natural, since economic theory is hermeneutic in nature – it seeks to interpret the meaning of outwardly simple, but vital phenomena. The materials of the article can be used to teach the history of economic thought.
43
Srinivasan, T. N. "Neoclassical Political Economy, the State and Economic Development." Asian Development Review 03, no. 02 (January 1985): 38–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0116110585000070.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, I will focus on the role of the state in economic development. Recent research suggests that it needs some re-evaluation. I will begin with a discussion of the crowning achievement of neoclassical economics, namely, the two fundamental theorems of welfare economics to set the stage for an analysis of the role of the state. Then, I will describe and summarize briefly the dominant strands of recent research on this issue and their implications. Drawing on some of my own work with Jagdish Bhagwati and Richard Brecher, I will comment in some detail on the implications of one of these strands for the pure theory of international trade and policy. Finally, I will explore some of the implications of the theory for development policy, in particular, for trade liberalization, and relate them to the experience of India in more than three decades of development planning.
44
ESTOLA, MATTI. "A DYNAMIC THEORY OF A FIRM: AN APPLICATION OF 'ECONOMIC FORCES'." Advances in Complex Systems 04, no. 01 (March 2001): 163–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0219525901000036.
Full textAbstract:
Static neoclassical theory of a firm and its dynamization by dynamic optimization assume profit functions inconsistent with each other. As a solution to this, we present a dynamic theory of a firm which is consistent with the static neoclassical theory. We define the 'economic forces' which act upon the production of the firm and show that the adjustment of production in a profit-seeking way may be stable or unstable. Explosive unstable production dynamics may occur due to 'economies of scale' or due to the development of wealth or technology; in stable cases the adjustment leads to the profit maximizing situation. Our model provides a micro basis for the modeling of economic growth at macro-level.
45
Sapir, J. "Economics of Information: The New Paradigm and Its Limits." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 10 (October 20, 2005): 4–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2005-10-4-24.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers historical development and scientific achievements of informational approach in economic theory. The author’s research is devoted to different versions of economic analysis using theory of asymmetric information. Positive and normative contradictions emerging from differences between economics of information and neoclassical theory are examined. Special attention is paid to internal problems of the new paradigm as well as to the role of state-governed economic policy based on theoretical implications of informational approach.
46
Rubinstein, A. "Public Interests and the Theory of Public Goods." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 10 (October 20, 2007): 90–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2007-10-90-113.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the modern public economics. The author analyzes the German "Finanzwissenschaft" tradition. Major issues connected to the problem of interests of the society as a whole were raised within this tradition: the problem of public goods pricing and the free-rider problem. The author considers this tradition taking into account the neoclassical economic concept of public sector. The article introduces the "public goods paradox" - incompatibility of methodological individualism and the positive demand for public goods. The author criticizes neoclassical theories (P. Samuelson, R. Musgrave, H. Margolis) and proposes a new approach. He develops the complementarity principle alternative to methodological individualism. According to this idea interests of the society as a whole are irreducible to interests of individuals.
47
de la Sienra, Adolfo García. "The Modal Laws of Economics." Philosophia Reformata 63, no. 2 (December 17, 1998): 182–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116117-90000154.
Full textAbstract:
Herman Dooyeweerd’s classical characterization of the meaning-kernel of the economic modality runs as follows: the sparing or frugal mode of administering scarce goods, implying an alternative choice of their destination with regard to the satisfaction of different human needs. My first aim in this paper is to show that Dooyeweerd’s characterization of the meaning-kernel of the economic modality naturally leads to neoclassical economic theory. In order to do this, I will provide an argument that, departing from Dooyeweerd’s definition of the meaning-kernel of the economic modality, concludes in a logical reconstruction of (the static case of) neoclassical economic theory (from now on denoted as NET). The fundamental law of this theory will turn out to be thus, naturally, a formulation of the fundamental modal law of economics. The second aim of the paper is epistemological since it discusses the methodological problem of the empirical claim of the theory. It is my hope that this discussion will clarify the limits of NET and provide a reply to the objections raised against it by Reformed scholars like Goudzwaard (1980).
48
Sainsbury, David. "Toward a dynamic capability theory of economic growth." Industrial and Corporate Change 29, no. 4 (December 12, 2019): 1047–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtz054.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract New theories of economic growth that are policy-relevant and connect with the histories of success and failure in economic development are urgently needed. This article compares the neoclassical (or market efficiency) school of thought with the production-capability school of thought which included Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List, and Joseph Schumpeter. Many affirmative, industrial policy steps by governments to promote economic development have been historically recorded—including in the UK and the United States. Meanwhile the neoclassical school has ignored the role of government in helping to create competitive advantage. It has also chosen to ignore how firms are formed, how technologies are acquired, and how industries emerge. The dynamic capability theory of economic growth developed here assigns the central role in economic growth to firms but also an important role to governments. The rate at which a country’s economy grows depends critically on whether its firms can build the capabilities to generate and take advantage of “windows of opportunity” that exist for innovation and new markets, and whether over time they are able to enhance their capabilities to move into higher value-added activities.1
49
Pokaninova, Daria. "METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE OF BUDDHISM AS AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH IN MODERN ECONOMIC THEORY." Scientific Research of Faculty of Economics. Electronic Journal 9, no. 2 (June 28, 2017): 15–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.38050/2078-3809-2017-9-2-15-26.
Full textAbstract:
The article discusses the provisions of Buddhist economics as an alternative approach in modern economic theory. These provisions are derived from the basic doctrines of Buddhism such as the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. The article also contains a comparison of Buddhist economics and neoclassical economics, which leads to the conclusion that Buddhist economics pays more attention to the issues of limited resources, accounting for non-economic factors of economic behavior, improving the welfare of society and externalities. These factors are relevant for the modern economics and are also considered by representatives of other alternative theories.
50
Rabin, M. "Incorporating limited rationality into economics." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 5 (May 20, 2014): 45–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2014-5-45-65.
Full textAbstract:
Harstad and Selten (this forum) raise interesting questions about the relative promise of optimization models and bounded-rationality models in making progress in economics. This article builds from their analysis by indicating the potential for using neoclassical (broadly defined) optimization models to integrate insights from psychology on the limits to rationality into economics. I lay out an approach to making (imperfect and incremental) improvements over previous economic theory by incorporating greater realism while attempting to maintain the breadth of application, the precision of predictions, and the insights of neoclassical theory. I then discuss how many human limits to full rationality are, in fact, well understood in terms of optimization.