The question of how prices and quantities interact and decisions and activities of large numbers of agents are coordinated in market economies has been a major theme in systematic economic investigations since their very inception at the time of French, British and Italian scholars in the seventeenth and eighteenth century. Adam Smith's analysis of the problem in The Wealth of Nations of 1776 is a locus classicus of the literature under consideration. Time and again, the definitive answer to the question has been proclaimed, from John Stuart Mill in his Principles of Political Economy in 1848 to Kenneth Arrow and Frank Hahn in their General Competitive Analysis in 1971. However, time and again, after careful scrutiny, the solutions put forward were found wanting for various reasons, from a lack of logical consistency to a lack of realism. Nevertheless, many economists accepted neoclassical general equilibrium theory of the Arrow-Debreu type as | 3 MISCELLANEOUS a coherent and convincing answer to the problem at hand. Critics of the theory and advocates of alternative approaches to economics either disregarded the problem of the price-quantity nexus altogether, dealt with it in a cavalier way or took diluted forms of the neoclassical theory to take care of it in an otherwise fundamentally different analytical framework. The resulting incomplete theories or attempted crossbreeding of essentially incompatible theories implied a competitive disadvantage in the market of ideas compared with general equilibrium theory, and accounts for the continuing dominance of the latter in economic theorising. This is the view expressed in the book by Yoshinori Shiozawa, Masashi Morioka and Kazuhisa Taniguchi, Microfoundations of Evolutionary Economics. They argue that this unsatisfactory situation, unsatisfactory to non-neoclassical economists to which they count themselves, is over because solid and realistic 'microfoundations of evolutionary economics' are available now. They stress that these are 'as fine and logically sure as Arrow and Debreu's model of competitive equilibrium' (p. vii). Their work, they claim, does not only offer the long-awaited breakthrough in this important field in economics, it also allows for a unification of several alternative theoretical currents in economics under a single umbrella. Although their focus of attention is on Evolutionary Economics, they insist that their findings provide support also for the Keynesian theory of effective demand and Post-Keynesian economics (PKE) (see p. vii) and the Classical approach to the theory of value and distribution as reformulated by Piero Sraffa in Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities in 1960. In fact, the authors emphasize the close relationship of their theory with Sraffa's: 'The new theory stands basically on the same theory and formulation begun by Piero Sraffa'; they add that it is not limited to the study of long-period positions of the economic system, but can analyse both 'short-and medium-period questions' (p. 133). 1 Such auspicious p...