The Pluralism Debate in Heterodox Economics

Lee, Frederic S.

doi:10.1177/0486613411402643

Cited by 43 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Economists are used to disagreeing about almost everything, the definition of their own discipline included (Backhouse and Medema ; Lee ). Part of this persistent and irreducible disagreement among economists is without doubt related to their belonging to different schools of thought .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The history of economic ideas alternates periods in which it seems that only one school of thought is about to prevail and a body of shared knowledge to emerge, to others in which it clearly appears that alternative approaches and methodological differences are there to stay. Interestingly, these differences do not remain confined in the ivory tower of academic research but they have important implications for practical economic policy (Lee 2010a). Cases of confrontation between the two groups have been numerous, the last one being the recent economic crisis, its causes and possible remedies…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis

Maio

2013

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explore the differences between mainstream and heterodox economists based on the responses to a questionnaire from a representative sample of Italian economists. Using different definitions for mainstream and heterodox economics, we compare the individual and academic characteristics of the economists belonging to these groups. We measure the within and between disagreement for each group and we test whether belonging to one or the other group predicts differences in economists' opinions on economic policy. Results show that: 1) mainstream and heterodox economists differ as to individual and academic characteristics and political views; 2) the disagreement within heterodox economics is lower than within mainstream economics; 3) some of commonly used ways of grouping heterodox and mainstream schools of thought have little explicative power in relation to individual opinions; 4) on critical economic policies, the opinions of heterodox and mainstream economists are significantly different even after controlling for a number of individual characteristics, including political opinions

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis

Maio

2013

American J Econ Sociol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are allowed to linger on the edges of the economics profession, albeit with none of the prestige or power of the orthodox elite. Tolerance of minorities in a diverse profession has been termed 'intellectual pluralism' and may be seen as an important aim of heterodox economics (Lee 2011). Formal minority rights for heterodoxy would affirm its ability to offer an alternative to orthodoxy and strengthen its cohesion as an academic community.…”

Section: The Heterodox Conditionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Pluralism and Monism in Heterodox Economics

Jackson

2017

Review of Radical Political Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pluralism is frequently supported by heterodox economists, but their rationale for it is not always transparent. It could be advocated for strategic reasons, as a response to the institutional power of orthodoxy, or for fundamental reasons, as a program for how economics should best be done. This paper evaluates strategic pluralism, compares it with the alternative of strategic monism, and relates both strategies to long-term objectives.JEL Classification: A14, B40, B50

show abstract

“…Lee (2008) argues that it is ''a body of economic theories that hold an alternative position vis-à -vis mainstream economics''. Our non-exhaustive list of constituent elements can be described as a ''concatenation of different heterodox critiques'' (Lee, 2011b, p. 544), although Dequech (2007 claims that heterodoxy has ''a higher degree of generality'' than the sum of its parts. In spite of these constructive attempts to propose a unifying definition, we argue that the underlying discursive analysis of heterodoxy has been neglected to date.…”

Section: Orthodoxy Heterodoxy and Critical Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Economics as a polymorphic discursive construct: heterodoxy and pluralism

Pilkington

2012

On the Horizon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -What do economists talk about? This seemingly innocent interrogation conceals a broader and innovative research programme, with the potential to renew the reflection on heterodox economics in a post-crisis scenario. The aim of this paper is to show that convergence between language for specific purposes and economics is possible, so as to single out the genesis and the emergence of critical economic discourse.Design/methodology/approach -After underlining the necessary collaboration between language and subject-matter specialists, the paper addresses the question of the problematic use of economics textbooks in English-speaking countries. Then, it deals with the fascinating question of the multiplicity of specialized meanings in economics. After pointing out the shortcomings of orthodoxy characterized by hyper-formalization and its inevitable corollary, the mathematical nature of the discipline, it investigates the genesis of critical economic discourse, which requires the acknowledgement of pluralism and the components of heterodoxy, in order to converge towards a process of disciplinary acculturation that goes hand in hand with the learning process of language for specific purposes.Findings -A deep-seated renewal of economics, consisting of a methodological shift towards the components of heterodoxy, has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of teaching English for economics, so that the latter effectively conveys specialized meaning.Research limitations/implications -Teaching and researching English for specific purposes necessitates enhanced collaboration between subject-matter specialists and applied linguists. However, this type of collaboration can be hampered by institutional or socio-professional obstacles.Social implications -Discursive analysis has become indispensable in order to surmount the collective failure of mainstream economics in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. With the help of textbooks of a new kind, one must go beyond the vision of students as mere consumers of knowledge.Originality/value -Language for specific purposes has long shown interest in economics, but is the reciprocal true? This paper proposes an original association, by putting the two disciplinary fields on an equal footing, and by bringing new synergies forward.

show abstract

The Pluralism Debate in Heterodox Economics

Cited by 43 publications

References 29 publications

Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis

Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis

Strategic Pluralism and Monism in Heterodox Economics

Economics as a polymorphic discursive construct: heterodoxy and pluralism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About