Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277389 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2017
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) [ISSN:] 2052-7772 [Volume:] 14 [Issue:] 2 [Year:] 2017 [Pages:] 222-237
Verlag: 
Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Zusammenfassung: 
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
Schlagwörter: 
Minsky
financial instability
post-Keynesian economics
JEL: 
E12
E32
E44
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.