Jakob Kapeller, the University of Duisburg-Essen Professor for Socio-Economics and Lead Editor of the Heterodox Economics Newsletter, situates pluralist economics in its historical trajectory and charts a possible course for the future of heterodoxy. Professor Kapeller suggests that pluralism is essential in capturing the complexity of multifaceted economic phenomena, and consequently a variety of models must be retained, each fit for different institutional contexts. We all know economics is an incredibly hierarchical profession; prof. Kapeller provides some fascinating data on self-citation of top journals in comparison with other social sciences.

From a historical perspective, before the Great Depression global pluralism held sway as economics was in its 'pluralist phase.' The 'Golden Age' of the post-war period featured a division of labour under the Samuelsonian neoclassical synthesis, with neoclassical economics dominating micro whilst neo (or 'bastard'/'hydraulic', depending on who one asks) Keynesian was hegemonic in macro. We're now in the period of neoclassical dominance. Whilst some heterodox economists are staunchly non-pluralist, maintaining that all the answers can be found in a correct reading of, for example, Keynes or Marx, Prof. Kapeller suggests heterodox economics is more closely embedded with other social sciences.

With respect to 'Doing Pluralism', Prof. Kapeller outlines the schema developed in his brilliant paper 'Heterodox United vs. Mainstream City? Sketching a Framework for Interested Pluralism in Economics.' * This begins with a pairwise comparison of theoretical frameworks, and determines whether competing fields should be integrated or differentiated and tested between. This principle is outlined in a synthesis between Veblen, Minsky, and Keynes, to examine financial cycles.

*Professor Kapeller's paper can be downloaded here: [ Ссылка ]

Follow us on:
Facebook: [ Ссылка ]
Twitter: [ Ссылка ]
Website: [ Ссылка ]

свернуть