Heterodox Theories of Economic Growth and Income Distribution: A Partial Survey

Dutt, Amitava Krishna

doi:10.1111/joes.12243

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The determinants of the rate of economic growth of an economy over relatively “long” periods of time, income distribution between classes, and the relationship between them have attracted the attention of economists for a long time, given their interest in the wealth of nations and income inequality. In particular, heterodox economists have for several decades examined different models of growth and distribution to address these issues, including, most prominently, models following classical‐Marxian and post‐Keynesian approaches (see Dutt, ). Recently, a new model, called by some the Sraffian supermultiplier model, has been developed by Serrano (, ), with further contributions by Freitas and Serrano (), Allain () and Lavoie (), among others.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some observations on models of growth and distribution with autonomous demand growth

Dutt

2018

Metroeconomica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper offers some theoretical and methodological observations on a model of growth and distribution, recently developed by Franklin Serrano and others and called the Sraffian supermultiplier model, in which the growth of autonomous capitalist consumption demand and distribution are exogenously given and capacity utilization is at an exogenously given “normal” level in long‐run equilibrium. First, it provides a simple long‐run equilibrium version and dynamic formulation of the model, and compares it to other models of growth and distribution using a common framework and focusing on the effect of a change in income distribution on growth. Second, it shows that the model can be modified to examine other components of autonomous demand growth, including government spending, exports, consumption by workers, and investment and technical change, and to simultaneous multiple sources of autonomous demand growth. Finally, it comments on some methodological issues concerning the model, and on its implications for the notion of long‐run equilibrium.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some observations on models of growth and distribution with autonomous demand growth

Dutt

2018

Metroeconomica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This definition of the neoclassical approach is rooted in the traditions of critical economic thinking (Eatwell & Milgate, 1983; Garegnani, 1990; Graziani, 2003; Pasinetti, 2000) and includes the most recent developments in the contemporary mainstream versions of the neoclassical theory (Blanchard & Fischer, 1989; Blanchard et al., 2020). Without ever denying the variety of research methods in economics (Dow, 2007), this definition of neoclassical influence can help to establish a precise dividing line capable of allowing a comparative approach with alternative research programs (Blanchard & Brancaccio, 2019; Brancaccio & Saraceno, 2017; on the comparative approach, see also Dutt, 1990, 2017).…”

Section: A Definition Of Neoclassical “Influence” On Ab Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neoclassical influences in agent‐based literature: A systematic review

Brancaccio

Gallegati

Giammetti

2021

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies highlight that the method and the object of analysis of Agent‐Based models are in various respects in stark contrast to the prevailing neoclassical paradigm and therefore should be included in the traditions of alternative economic thought. In this paper, however, we show that distinctive features of the neoclassical theory can be found in most of the AB literature. Through a systematic review of most cited academic papers published in the period 1996–2019 and dedicated to Agent‐Based models, we show that a “neoclassical influence” can be detected in 61% of papers, while only 39% do not have links with the mainstream neoclassical approach. We also note that after the “great recession” started in 2008 the neoclassical influences on AB literature decline to a significant extent.

show abstract

“…Judging from Marx's theoretical logic or actual total amount, compensation for constant capital is the most important part of economic "aggregate demand". In some variants of the neo-Kaleckian model, the researchers divide the economy into two sectors relative to the production of capital goods and consumer goods and introduce constant capital is introduced through the production of intermediate goods (Dutt, 1988(Dutt, , 2017. However, as mentioned earlier, such practice still cannot respond to Marx's second-level criticism of "Smith's Dogma", i.e.…”

Section: Reflections On Neo-kaleckian Growth Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections on neo-Kaleckian growth regimes: a Marxian reproduction perspective

Zhao

Tian

Duan

2021

CPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe neo-Kaleckian model follows the ideas of Marx, Keynes and Kalecki, that investment is a key influencing factor in the dynamics of the capitalist mode of production. Through the discussion of different forms of investment decision function, this paper constructs the analysis framework of wage-led and profit-led economic growth regimes.Design/methodology/approachThe model has become an important theoretical paradigm for current Western heterodox economists regarding the research on the impact of functional income distribution on economic growth, and it has a very large impact on both theoretical and empirical research. Starting from Marx's reproduction theory, this article discusses the theoretical shortcomings of the neo-Kaleckian growth regime model.FindingsThis paper mainly focuses on three aspects: (1) the ideological legacy of “Smith's Dogma”; (2) neglecting the restrictions on income distribution from the organic composition of capital and the surplus value rate; (3) technological progress and the formation of a new long economic wave.Originality/valueThe authors believe that the neo-Kaleckian model unilaterally emphasizes the demand-side factors in the economy and, unconsciously or not, ignores the role of the supply-side, which makes it encounter certain limitations in explaining long-term growth. Even if some empirical conclusions are employed to bridge functional income distribution and technological progress, there is still a lack of a theoretical basis for accurately describing long-term economic changes using this model. In order to better promote high-quality economic development and accelerate the formation of a new pattern of economic development in which the domestic large-scale cycle is the mainstay and the domestic and international double cycles promote each other, the authors need to adopt a policy combination with the supply-side as the main and the demand-side as the supplement, and to work from both sides.

show abstract

Heterodox Theories of Economic Growth and Income Distribution: A Partial Survey

Cited by 21 publications

References 105 publications

Some observations on models of growth and distribution with autonomous demand growth

Some observations on models of growth and distribution with autonomous demand growth

Neoclassical influences in agent‐based literature: A systematic review

Reflections on neo-Kaleckian growth regimes: a Marxian reproduction perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About