Heterodox influences on Schumpeter

Abstract

PurposeJoseph Alois Schumpeter's ideas are in the discussion agenda of various economists working in different theoretical traditions. However, several aspects of his work remain unexplored. In particular, the origin of his ideas in the context of the then prevalent economic theories of the German‐speaking camp, have not been widely discussed. The purpose of this paper is claim that the elaborations of certain German‐speaking heterodox economists and/or schools of economic thought may be traced in Schumpeter's oeuvre.Design/methodology/approachThe influence of the German Historical School and specifically of Gustav von Schmoller, Max Weber and Werner Sombart on typical Schumpeterian themes is examined. In a similar vein, it is argued that Schumpeter's analysis presents striking similarities with the works of the Austro‐Marxist Economist Rudolf‐Hilferding and the Austrian Social Democrat Emil Lederer.FindingsIn this context, certain Schumpeterian insights appear less original.Originality/valueConclusively, it may be inferred that a deeper understanding of Schumpeterian economic analysis presupposes an acquaintance with certain heterodox theoretical traditions of the German‐speaking world.

Sumner Slichter and Emil Lederer on technological unemployment

“…Lederer's analysis with regard to the introduction of “inventions” in the production process is apparently very Schumpeterian (Michaelides et al , 2009, 2010) and its roots could even be traced – indirectly – to the German Historical School, via Schumpeter's influence (Michaelides and Milios, 2009). Moreover, according to Diebolt (2006), the deeper roots of several of Lederer's views could be traced back to Malthus (1836) and Sismondi (1827).…”

“…Joseph Alois Schumpeter, “one of the greatest economists of all time” (Haberler, 1950, p. 1), once described the great Austrian theoretician Emil Lederer as “the leading academic socialist of Germany in the 1920s” (Schumpeter, 1954, p. 884). However, with the exception of very few papers (Allgoewer, 2003; Dickler, 1981, 1983, 1987; Diebolt, 2006; Esslinger, 1997, 1999; Hagemann, 1997, 2000; Michaelides et al , 2010a, b) no adequate research seems to have been done on Emil Lederer's works and, as a result, most aspects of Emil Lederer's works and his affinities with other great economists remain unexplored.…”

Emil Lederer’s Theory of Economic Fluctuations and the Role of Financial Institutions

“…In his writings he comes off as a fascinating, if idiosyncratic, thinker" (Allgoewer 2003, p. 328). 4 However, Lederer's contribution remains unexplored as very few papers have been devoted to his work (Allgoewer 2003, Diebolt 2006Michaelides et al 2007;Michaelides et al 2008a;Michaelides et al 2008b). This paper focuses on Emil Lederer's theory of economic fluctuations.…”

Dis-locating innovation : amphibious geographies of creative reuse and alternative value production

“…As a fresh graduate from the University of Vienna, Schumpeter enrolled for political economy studies in Berlin, where he was exposed to the latest debates within the German Historical School and became "acquainted with Gustav von Schmoller, Werner Sombart, and other luminaries" (McCraw, 2007:57). Some commentators argue that while his perspective on innovation was praised in Anglo-Saxon economics for its originality, Schumpeter appears to have paid little recognition to the intellectual tradition he built upon (Chaloupek, 1995;Michaelides et al, 2010;Reinert, 2002). Thus, the weaving of convoluted genealogies of thought in Schumpeter's creative destruction imaginary would come closer to an instance of creative reuse, rather than a radical shift.…”