Response to De Vroey

Roger Backhouse and Mauro Boianovsky

The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2014, vol. 21, issue 4, 743-749

Abstract: This paper is a response to Michel De Vroey's review of our book, published in this issue of EJHET. Differently from De Vroey's, our aim is to understand the theoretical choices with which economists believed they were confronted at the time. This is reflected in the organisation of our book, the selection of topics (disequilibrium, imperfect competition, etc.), and the conclusions about the fate of disequilibrium macroeconomics.

Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09672567.2014.923012 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:eujhet:v:21:y:2014:i:4:p:743-749

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REJH20

DOI: 10.1080/09672567.2014.923012

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought is currently edited by José Luís Cardoso

More articles in The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().