The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?

Abstract

This paper investigates whether since the 1980s neoclassical economics has been in the process of being supplanted as the dominant research programme in economics by a collection of competing research approaches which share relatively little in common with each other or with neoclassical economics. A shortlist of the new approaches in recent economics includes game theory, experimental economics, behavioral economics, evolutionary economics, neuroeconomics, and non-linear complexity theory. Two hypotheses are advanced -one regarding the relation between economics instruction and economics research and one regarding the nature of the economics research frontier -to describe social-institutional practices that contribute to the replication of economics as a field. Two further hypotheses are advanced -one regarding the boundaries of the field and one regarding how the field appraises itself -to create a historical-methodological framework for evaluating the question of change in economics and change in recent economics in particular. Finally, the paper distinguishes three leading explanations -the 'breakdown' view, the 'takeover' view, and the 'maturity' view -of why neoclassical economics no longer dominates a mainstream economics.

The Dilemma Between the Heterodox-the Orthodox Economics and Its Ideology

“…(Colander, 2000;Colander et al, 2004;Davis, 2006) These new research programs-including classical game theory, evolutionary game theory, behavioral game theory, evolutionary economics, behavioral economics, experimental economics, neuro-economics and agent-based complexity economics-currently exhibit considerable heterogeneity, reflecting their separate origins primarily in different sciences outside economics and their pursuit by relatively distinct communities of researchers within economics. This development might consequently be taken as evidence that economics is becoming more pluralistic, perhaps under the impact of a "reverse imperialism".…”

Sickonomics: Diagnoses and Remedies

“…But there are challenges to the view that these trends persisted with full force beyond 1990 (Colander 2005, Colander et al 2004, Davis 2006. Notably these accounts are dismissed by Fine and Milonakis (2009, pp.…”

The role of econometrics in economic science: An essay about the monopolization of economic methodology by econometric methods

“…These authors support that currently formalism is essentially methodological and the profession seems to be moving towards a more intuitive paradigm. A very wide range of heterodoxies has gained increased relevance in economic theory (Davis, 2006). If we think that a science depends on education and research we understand that, despite the instruction remains highly connected to the orthodoxy, research is increasingly characterized by a high degree of theoretical and methodological pluralism.…”