Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/64444
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVernengo, Matiasen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-08-19en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-09-28T12:39:03Z-
dc.date.available2012-09-28T12:39:03Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/64444-
dc.description.abstractThis paper provides a rejoinder to Colander, Holt and Rosser (2010) strategy to win friends and influence mainstream economics. It is suggested that their strategy is counter-productive, and while it might gain them friends, it will not lead to increased influence of heterodox ideas within what they term the cutting edge of the profession. It is argued that their failure to understand the nature of heterodoxy, and the reason for the eclecticism of the mainstream, associated to the rise of vulgar economics, undermines their arguments.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisher|aUniv. of Utah, Dep. of Economics |cSalt Lake City, Utahen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aWorking Paper, University of Utah, Department of Economics |x2011-14en_US
dc.subject.jelB41en_US
dc.subject.jelB59en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.keywordMethodologyen_US
dc.subject.keywordHeterodox Economicsen_US
dc.titleThe return of vulgar economics: A rejoinder to Colander, Holt and Rosseren_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn666400261en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen_US

Files in This Item:
File
Size
99.79 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.