Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277212 
Year of Publication: 
2011
Citation: 
[Journal:] Intervention. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies [ISSN:] 2195-3376 [Volume:] 08 [Issue:] 1 [Year:] 2011 [Pages:] 165-182
Publisher: 
Metropolis-Verlag, Marburg
Abstract: 
In Cambridge, UK, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there were some of the most distinguished post-war non-neoclassical economists, which included Nicholas Kaldor, Joan Robinson and Piero Sraffa. The Cambridge capital theory controversies seemed to have been decisively settled in Cambridge, UK's favour, yet no alternative paradigm emerged to challenge the prevailing neoclassical orthodoxy. This paper briefly looks at the reasons for this, including why the Cambridge capital theory debate, despite its important ramifications, is now largely forgotten. The paper concludes by looking at a further problem that vitiates the aggregate production function, resulting from the use of constant-price value data in econometric estimation. This criticism has also been widely ignored.
Subjects: 
production function
Cantabrigian Economics
JEL: 
B31
B5
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





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