The Inexhaustible Mine?

Gabriel F. Benzecry and Daniel J. Smith

Southern Economic Journal, 2026, vol. 92, issue 3, 838-855

Abstract: Why study the history of economic thought (HET)? We offer two novel contributions to the literature justifying HET. First, we provide a broad survey of the historical and contemporary justifications for HET, distilling three central categories of arguments: (1) HET fosters economic research, (2) it is useful for understanding the sociology of the organization and evolution of economics, and (3) it helps economists serve as more effective public intellectuals. Second, we address the critique of HET that it is akin to prospecting a stripped mine whose valuable insights have long since been extracted and incorporated into modern research. We argue that the notion of diminishing returns to HET applies only in a narrow, Malthusian sense. Economists are not uniform inputs, technological advances have lowered the costs of studying HET, and the field continues to grow as new influences on key thinkers emerge and economic thought evolves. Far from exhaustion, our survey and extension demonstrate that HET remains a productive resource for economists.

Date: 2026
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.70002

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:wly:soecon:v:92:y:2026:i:3:p:838-855

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Southern Economic Journal from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().