Neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian controversies on accumulation theory
Sergio Cesaratto ()
Department of Economics University of Siena from Department of Economics, University of Siena
With some exceptions, non-orthodox economists share the ‘Keynesian Hypothesis’ of the independence of investment from capacity-savings, in the long-run no less than the short-run. This hypothesis marks an essential point of difference from neo-classical theory. Keynes showed that within the limits of the existing capacity utilisation, it is investment that determines savings. The correct way to extend this conclusion to the long run is the object of the present paper. In particular, it provides an assessment of the controversy on demand-led growth theory that has taken place since the mid-1980s between neo-Kaleckian and Sraffian authors, particularly those closer to the late Piero Garegnani’s ‘surplus approach’. For the sake of the argument the Sraffian front is divided between a first and a second Sraffian position (the second defined as Sraffian supermultiplier approach). Although I argue that the second approach is the most promising, the dissention should not be over-emphasised, so will also often generically refer to Sraffian authors.
JEL-codes: B51 E11 E22 O41 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:usi:wpaper:650
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Department of Economics University of Siena from Department of Economics, University of Siena Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Fabrizio Becatti ().