ArgumentThis paper argues that the economics discipline is highly concentrated, which may inhibit scientific innovation and change in the future. The argument is based on an empirical investigation of six dimensions of concentration in economics between 1956 and 2016 using a large-scale data set. The results show that North America accounts for nearly half of all articles and three quarters of all citations. Twenty institutions reap a share of 42 percent of citations, five journals a share of 28.5 percent, and 100 authors a share of 15.5 percent. A total of 2.8 percent of citations may be attributed to heterodox schools of thought. Also top articles are concentrated along these dimensions. Overall, concentration has strongly increased over the last six decades.

The notion of an 'orthodox core-heterodox periphery' structure and the extent of interdisciplinary links have been widely discussed, and partially investigated bibliometrically, within economic discourse. We extend this research by applying tools from social network analysis to citation data of three economics departments located in Vienna, two mainstream and one non-mainstream, to assess their relative citation patterns. We show that both mainstream economics departments follow the asserted core-periphery pattern and have a mono-disciplinary research focus, while the citation network of the non-mainstream department has a polycentric structure and is both more heterodox and interdisciplinary. These findings suggest that discussions about the future of heterodox economics should pay more attention to the organizational level and seek allies from other disciplines. ARTICLE HISTORY

Since the beginnings of modern economics, economists sought to emulate the revolution in physics initiated by Newton's 'Principia' (1687). Concepts from mechanics have influenced economic models both in terms of methodology and content. The aim of this theoretical paper is to put forward a novel economic modeling framework that extends the analogies between economics and classical mechanics from constrained optimization to constrained dynamics. We introduce the concepts of economic forces and economic power that bear striking resemblance to physical forces and the reciprocal value of mass. In this setup, the change of a variable is determined by the forces agents employ to change it according to their desire, their power to assert their interest, and constraint forces emerging from system constraints. The approach is based on a genuine dynamic out-of-equilibrium analysis and can incorporate heterogeneous agents, prisoner's dilemma situations, and behavioral assumptions different from rationality and utility maximization. Thereby, it seeks to overcome some restrictions inherent to approaches based on optimization under constraint and provide an out-of-equilibrium foundation for equilibrium models. We transform a static textbook exchange model into a dynamic model, and reflect on advantages, extensions and caveats of our modeling approach.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractHas the global financial crisis of 2007ff had a visible impact on the economics profession? To answer this question we employ a bibliometric approach and compare the content and orientation of economic literature before and after the crisis with reference to two different samples: A large-scale sample consisting of more than 440,000 articles published between 1956 and 2016 and a smaller sample of 400 top-cited papers before and after the crisis. Our results suggest that -unlike the Great Depression of the 1930s -the current financial crisis did not lead to any major theoretical or methodological changes in contemporary economics, although the topic of financial instability received increased attention after the crisis.

The paper investigates net lending and net borrowing flows of the institutional sectors in Europe since the introduction of the Euro in 1999. Applying a simple statistical apparatus, this paper is novel in describing the sectoral behavior leading up to and during the crisis. We find that (1) many countries of the Northern group were characterized by low public deficits or even budget surpluses, current account surpluses and a private sector in a net lending position. In countries of the Southern periphery, in the Anglo-Saxon countries as well as in many Eastern European Economies private sector net borrowing coincided with a budget deficit and substantial current account deficits. (2) With the onset of the crisis private net lending soared in all countries while all governments incurred deficits, consistent with the notion of a balance sheet recession. (3) Private net lending is pro-cyclical, reinforcing the economic downturn, while public net lending is countercyclical in all countries. (4) Household net lending tends to lead the business cycle, while corporate net lending tends to lag it especially in the Northern group. (5) Prominent concepts asserting causal relationships in sectoral net lending, such as Ricardian equivalence and the twin deficit hypothesis are not supported by the data.