Neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian Controversies on the Theory of Accumulation

Sergio Cesaratto ()

Review of Political Economy, 2015, vol. 27, issue 2, 154-182

Abstract: Non-orthodox economists generally share the Keynesian Hypothesis of the independence of investment from capacity savings, in the long run no less than in the short run. This hypothesis marks an essential point of difference from neoclassical theory. Keynes showed that within the limits of the existing capacity utilisation, investment determines savings rather than the other way around. How best to extend this conclusion to the long run is the object of the current paper. The paper assesses the controversy on demand-led growth that has taken place since the mid-1980s between neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian authors. The Sraffian front may be divided into a first and a second Sraffian position, the latter being the Sraffian supermultiplier approach. I shall argue that this second approach is the most promising framework for analysing economic growth.

Date: 2015
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (49)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09538259.2015.1010708 (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:revpoe:v:27:y:2015:i:2:p:154-182

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRPE20

DOI: 10.1080/09538259.2015.1010708

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Political Economy is currently edited by Steve Pressman and Louis-Philippe Rochon

More articles in Review of Political Economy from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().