structural economic dynamics

Pasinetti, Luigi Lodovico; Scazzieri, Roberto

doi:10.1057/9780230226203.3620

Cited by 19 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Government policies, in their view, should just facilitate the private sector through supply‐side support, while keeping incentives in line with comparative advantage. This is clearly a far cry from the ideas of the old development economists, as well as deeply at odds with major non‐mainstream approaches, viz Nicholas Kaldor's () Keynesian growth laws (further developed by Anthony Thirlwall and co‐authors), Luigi Pasinetti's (, ) demand‐driven structural economic dynamics, Lance Taylor's (, , ) structuralist macroeconomics, Erik Reinert's () historical school approach inspired by List and Schumpeter, and the institutionalist approach to late industrialization of Alexander Gerschenkron (), developed further by Alice Amsden, Ha‐Joon Chang and Robert Wade. What can we learn from the ‘new’ development economics that is different from what these non‐mainstream development economists have been arguing all the time?…”

Section: The Life Death and Rebirth Of A Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Change

Storm¹

2015

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development economics appears to have come full circle, as interest in and concern for industrialization have made a comeback, echoing major concerns of the early development economists. However, when it comes to the practice of industrialization strategy and industrial policy, the default recommendation is still the market and static comparative advantage — the main task of governments, in the new view, is to impose institutional reforms and improve governance so as to allow markets to perform more efficiently. History is thus about to repeat itself, but this time as farce, because no country has managed to climb the industrial ladder just by ‘getting prices and institutions right’. We have to re‐learn the old lessons of how to industrialize, learning from past mistakes and taking into account new challenges posed by today's global realities.

show abstract

Section: The Life Death and Rebirth Of A Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Change

Storm¹

2015

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On this account the model is unable to capture the increasing rates of profit that technologically progressive industries are able to enjoy in comparison with others at least for some periods of time. It also means that the model cannot capture “structural change” (Pasinetti, ) over secular long periods in which technological change drives productivity improvements and raises per capita incomes which in turn alters the structure of consumption demand. The second remark concerns a crucial methodological aspect that starkly contrasts the Sraffian general equilibrium model from the dominant neoclassical and neo‐Walrasian intertemporal equilibrium models.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sraffian general equilibrium

Parchure

2019

Metroeconomica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If the Sraffa system of equations is augmented by consumption demand equations of households and investment demand equations of industries the result is a complete system of general equilibrium having a unique positive solution for the relative prices, absolute levels of industrial outputs, the rates of growth and profit, the real wage rate, and the shares of ownership of the capital stock. The model has been generalized to include the government sector and determine the tax rate and public expenditure. Constructive algorithms for the computation of the general equilibrium have been presented. Empirical evidence from cross‐country sources has been gathered in support of a central inference of the model viz. the long‐run convergence of industrial growth rates and rates of profit towards uniformity.

show abstract

“…(Albala & Miguel, 1999: s. 301;Ayaş, 2012;Bekhet, 2009;Dietzenbacher ve Los 2000;Pasinetti, 2006;). Talep koşullarını sabit kabul eden klasik yaklaşımda büyüme; üretimin temel girdileri olarak da bilinen sermaye, işgücü ve verimlilik unsurları ile ilişkilendirilmekte ve arz unsurlarının büyüme üzerindeki kısmi etkileri, Büyüme Muhasebesi ile analiz edilmektedir.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Analysis of Economic Growth With Regard To Demand Components: Structural Decomposition Model

Ayaş¹

2017

Ekonomik Yaklasim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

structural economic dynamics

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

Structural Change

Structural Change

Sraffian general equilibrium

Analysis of Economic Growth With Regard To Demand Components: Structural Decomposition Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About