Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277389 
Year of Publication: 
2017
Citation: 
[Journal:] European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) [ISSN:] 2052-7772 [Volume:] 14 [Issue:] 2 [Year:] 2017 [Pages:] 222-237
Publisher: 
Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Abstract: 
This paper intends to contribute to the contemporary discussions about Minsky's economics by reviewing how the key ideas of Minsky have been formalised in the heterodox literature over the last three decades or so. First, a distinction is made between the different models based on (a) the source of financial instability they focus on, (b) the type of heterodox macroeconomic framework into which Minskyan ideas are incorporated and (c) the purpose and the nature of the dynamic analysis. Second, the key lessons learned from modelling Minsky are outlined. Finally, the paper calls for more empirically driven models, points out the usefulness of agent-based approaches and highlights the need for the development of Minsky models on open economy, shadow banking and environmental issues
Subjects: 
Minsky
financial instability
post-Keynesian economics
JEL: 
E12
E32
E44
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.