Roundtable: The Progress of Heterodox Economics
A. W. Bob Coats,
Daniel R. Fusfeld,
Craufurd Goodwin and
Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2000, vol. 22, issue 2, 145-148
The central theme of this session is the changing relationship between â€œorthodoxâ€ (i.e., mainstream, neoclassical) and â€œheterodoxâ€ economics, especially in the USA, during the past two or three decades. Economics is such a large and heterogeneous discipline that it cannot be characterized both briefly and accurately. Alongside the growth of formalization and mathematization, and the high degree of uniformity in the undergraduate and graduate curricula and in the leading textbooks, there are also within the subject a number of dissenting or deviant doctrinal schools, rival methodological approaches, and innovative developments designed to remedy its defects and/or overcome its limitations. Moreover, many of the outspoken criticisms of the status quo, proposed remedies, and innovations, originate with or are endorsed by prominent economists with impeccable professional credentials. Indeed, in some cases their contributions threaten the discipline's foundations and can, therefore, be considered a species of â€œorthodox subversion.â€
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:22:y:2000:i:02:p:145-148_00
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Journal of the History of Economic Thought from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Keith Waters ().