'History versus Equilibrium' and the Theory of Economic Growth, by Mark Setterfield: A Comment

Phillip Toner

Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2001, vol. 25, issue 1, 97-102

Abstract: Setterfield criticised previous formal models of cumulative causation (CC) for their determinism in which economic growth rates are simply a function of "initial conditions". Setterfield argued these formal models accurately represented the work of the leading CC figure, Nicholas Kaldor. This paper argues that, on the contrary, Kaldor identified a number of endogenous mechanisms that account for those stylised facts of economic history, which are absent in formal models of CC. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Date: 2001
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:cambje:v:25:y:2001:i:1:p:97-102

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Cambridge Journal of Economics is currently edited by Jacqui Lagrue

More articles in Cambridge Journal of Economics from Cambridge Political Economy Society Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().