Skip to main content

Reswitching, Wicksell Effects, and the Neo-Classical Production Function

  • Chapter
Transformational Growth and Effective Demand
  • 56 Accesses

Abstract

The Cambridge debate over capital theory has raised doubts about the validity of the neo-Classical theory of distribution (see G.C. Harcourt). As this theory is widely assumed in empirical work, and often drawn upon in the analysis of policy, a demonstration that it is seriously flawed would require extensive rethinking of many areas of mainstream economics. Accordingly, two principal lines of defense have been advanced. The first, an oblique defense, accepts the critique, but asserts that only a simplifying ‘parable’ has been damaged. The main corpus of neo-Classicism, general equilibrium theory, remains unscatched. The second is a counterattack, and contends that a well-ordered neo-Classical production function can be constructed after all (see Gallaway and Shukla, 1974, and refutations by Garegnani and by Sato, 1976).

* American Economic Review, 67(5) (1977).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Albin, P. (1975) ‘Reswitching: An Empirical Observation,’ Kyklos, 1 (28) pp. 149–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaduri, A. (1969) ‘On the Significance of Recent Controversies on Capital Theory: A Marxian View,’ Economic Journal, 79, pp. 532–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, K. (1970) ‘On the Maximum Number of Switches Between Two Production Systems,’ Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Statistik, 106, pp. 409–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, M. et al. (1966) ‘Nature and Implications of the Reswitching of Techniques’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80, pp. 526–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Champernowne, D.G. (1954) ‘The Production Function and the Theory of Capital: A Comment,’ Review of Economic Studies, 2 (21) pp. 112–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John B. (1956) The Distribution of Wealth: A Theory of Wages, Interest and Profits (New York: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallaway, L. and V. Shukla (1974) ‘The Neoclassical Production Function,’ American Economic Review, 64, pp. 348–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallaway, L. and V. Shukla (1976) ‘Reply,’ American Economic Review, 66, pp. 433–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garegnani, P. (1966) ‘Switching of Techniques,’ Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80, pp. 554–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garegnani, P. (1970) ‘Heterogeneous Capital, the Production Function and the Theory of Distribution,’ Review of Economic Studies, 37, pp. 407–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garegnani, P. (1976) ‘The Neoclassical Production Function: Comment,’ American Economic Review, 66, pp. 424–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt, G.C. (1972) Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital (London, New York).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John (1963) Theory of Wages (London) 2nd edn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John (1965) Capital and Growth (New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollis, Martin and Nell, Edward J. (1975) Rational Economic Man: A Philosophical Critique of Neo-Classical Economics (London, New York).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nell, E.J. (1970) ‘A Note on Cambridge Controversies in Capital Theory,’ Journal of Economic Literature, 8, pp. 41–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. (1954) ‘The Production Function and the Theory of Capital,’ Review of Economic Studies, 2 (21) pp. 81–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. (1970) ‘Capital Theory Up to Date,’ Canadian Journal of Economics, 3, pp. 309–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P.A. (1962) ‘Parable and Realism in Capital Theory: The Surrogate Production Function,’ Review of Economic Studies, 29, pp. 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sato, K. (1976) ‘The Neoclassical Production Function: Comment,’ American Economic Review, 66, pp. 428–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaventa, L. (1970) ‘The Rate of Profit, Rate of Growth and Capital Intensity in a Simple Production Model,’ Oxford Economic Papers, 22, pp. 129–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sraffa, Piero (1960) Production of Commodities By Means of Commodities (London, New York).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1992 Edward J. Nell

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Laibman, D., Nell, E. (1992). Reswitching, Wicksell Effects, and the Neo-Classical Production Function. In: Transformational Growth and Effective Demand. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21779-3_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics