Conclusion

Robert Bigg

Chapter 13 in Cambridge and the Monetary Theory of Production, 1990, pp 185-194 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract The main thesis of this book is that the collapse of the Marshallian research programme was due to an inherent split in the very make-up of the programme itself. Marshall’s contribution to the state of political economy in the late nineteenth century was considerable (see, for example, Deane, 1989, pp. 134–41), but it was also essentially a compromise: by drawing together and reconciling many of the different strands of political economy Marshall’s framework helped weld economics into a distinct and separate discipline (the methodological issues being dealt with at much the same time by Keynes’s father, John Neville, in his Scope and Method of Political Economy first published in 1890 — see Deane, 1983). The cost of the compromise was that not all the problems could actually be resolved into a single framework and some cracks were thus papered over.

Keywords: Trade Cycle; Full Employment; Quantity Theory; Marginal Analysis; Monetary Theory (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1990
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

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:pal:palchp:978-0-230-37121-7_13

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9780230371217

DOI: 10.1057/9780230371217_13

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().