Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Dynamics of the Wealth of Nations pp 149–172Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Samuelson and the 93% Scarcity Theory of Value

  • Chapter

Abstract

In ‘Ricardo and the 93% Labor Theory of Value’, Stigler (1958) demonstrates that Ricardo’s labour theory of value cannot be defended as an analytical proposition but can be defended as an empirical proposition. Here, Stigler’s criteria for analytical and empirical value theories are used to evaluate the Cambridge capital theory controversies, particularly Samuelson’s contribution. The evaluation demonstrates that the neoclassical scarcity theory of value — the conception of price as an index of resource scarcity relative to consumption demand — cannot be defended analytically but can be defended empirically. The analytical deficiencies in both theories of value stem from capital-related problems. For neoclassical theory, which is the focus of this paper, these problems are not eliminated at the general equilibrium level. Instead, the problems are sidestepped by abandoning the scarcity theory of value as an analytical proposition.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Archibald, G. Christopher (1965) ‘The Qualitative Content of Maximizing Models’, Journal of Political Economy, 73 (February), pp. 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. and Hahn, Frank H. (1971) General Competitive Analysis (San Francisco: Holden-Day).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaug, Mark (1975) The Cambridge Revolution: Success or Failure?, revised edition (London: Institute of Economic Affairs).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaug, Mark (1980) The Methodology of Economics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bliss, Christopher J. (1975) Capital Theory and the Distribution of Income (Amsterdam: North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen von (1959) Capital and Interest, Vols. I - III, trans-lated by George D. Huncke (South Holland, Ill.: Libertarian Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Murray (1969) ‘Substitution–Composition Effects, Capital Inten-sity, Uniqueness and Growth’, Economic Journal, 79 (June) pp. 334–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John Bates (1891) ‘Distribution as Determined by a Law of Rent’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 5 (April) pp. 289–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John Bates (1899) The Distribution of Wealth (New York: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Avi J. (1984) ‘The Methodological Resolution of the Cambridge Controversies’, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 6 (Summer) pp. 614–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Avi J. (1989) ‘Prices Capital and the One-Commodity Model in Neoclassical and Classical “Theories”’, History of Political Economy, 21 (Summer) pp. 231–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Avi J. and Cohen, Jon S. (1983) ‘Classical and Neoclassical Theories of General Equilibrium’, Australian Economic Papers, 22 (June) pp. 180–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobb, Maurice (1973) Theories of Value and Distribution Since Adam Smith (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eltis, Walter A. (1973) Growth and Distribution (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Charles E. (1969) The Neoclassical Theory of Production and Distribution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Charles E. (1972) ‘The Current State of Capital Theory. A Tale of Two Paradigms’, Southern Economic Journal, 39 (October) pp. 160–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Charles E. and Allen, Robert F. (1970) ‘Factor Prices, Com-modity Prices, and Switches of Technique’, Western Economic Journal, 8 (June) pp. 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garegnani, Pierangelo (1976) ‘On a Change in the Notion of Equilibrium in Recent Work on Value and Distribution’, in Essays in Modern Capital Theory, edited by Murray Brown, Kazuo Sato and Paul Zarembka (Amsterdam: North-Holland) pp. 25–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, Frank H. (1972) The Share of Wages in the National Income (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, Frank H. (1975) ‘Revival of Political Economy: The Wrong Issues and the Wrong Argument’, Economic Record, 51 (September) pp. 360–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, Frank H. (1981) ‘General Equilibrium Theory’, in The Crisis in Economic Theory, edited by Daniel Bell and Irving Kristol, pp. 123–38 (New York: Basic Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, Frank H. (1982) ‘The Neo-Ricardians’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 6 (December) pp. 353–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt, Geoffrey C. (1982) ‘The Cambridge Controversies: Old Ways and New Horizons–Or Dead End?’, in The Social Science Imperialists, edited by Prue Kerr, pp. 239–78 (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John R. (1932) The Theory of Wages (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John R. (1965) Capital and Growth (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, John R. (1973) Capital and Time (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, Adolph (1981) ‘Is Economic Value Still A Problem?’, Social Research, 48 (Winter) pp. 786–815.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinvaud, Edmond (1966) ‘Interest Rates in the Allocation of Resources’, in The Theory of Interest Rates, edited by Frank H. Hahn and Frank Brechling, pp. 209–41 (New York: St. Martin’s Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinvaud, Edmond (1985) Lectures on Microeconomic Theory, revised edition (Amsterdam: North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Alfred (1920) Principles of Economics, 8th edition (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Meek, Ronald L. (1977) ‘Value in the History of Economic Thought’, in Smith, Marx and After, pp. 149–64 (London: Chapman and Hall).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Milgate, Murray (1979) ‘On the Origin of the Notion of “Intertemporal Equilibrium”’, Economica, 46 (February) pp. 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasinetti, Luigi (1969) ‘Switches of Technique and the “Rate of Return” in Capital Theory’, Economic Journal, 79 (September) pp. 508–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasinetti, Luigi (1970) ‘Again on Capital Theory and Solow’s “Rate of Return”’, Economic Journal, 80 (June) pp. 428–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasinetti, Luigi (1974) Growth and Income Distribution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasinetti, Luigi (1986) ‘Theory of Value–A Source of Alternative Paradigms in Economic Analysis’, in Foundation of Economics, edited by Mauro Baranzini and Roberto Scazzieri, pp. 409–31. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, Frank P. (1928) ‘A Mathematical Theory of Saving’, Economic Journal, 38 (December) pp. 543–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo, David (1951–73) Works and Correspondence (I-X), edited by Piero Sraffa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1947) Foundations of Economic Analysis (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1966a) ‘Rejoinder: Agreements, Disagreements, Doubts and the Case of Induced Harrod-Neutral Technical Change’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 48 (November) pp. 444–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1966b) ‘A Summing Up’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80 (November) pp. 568–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1975) ‘Steady-State and Transient Relations: A Reply on Reswitching’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 89 (February) pp. 40–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, Paul A. (1980) Economics, 11th edition (New York: McGraw-Hill).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Amartya (1974) ‘On Some Debates in Capital Theory’, Economica, 41 (August) pp. 328–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solow, Robert M. (1963) Capital Theory and the Rate of Return (Amsterdam: North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, Robert M. (1975) ‘Cambridge and the Real World’, Times Literary Supplement (14 March) pp. 277–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, Robert M. (1985) ‘Economics: Is Something Missing?’, in Economic History and the Modern Economist, edited by William N. Parker, pp. 21–9 (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, George J. (1958) ‘Ricardo and the 93% Labor Theory of Value’, American Economic Review, 48 (June) pp. 356–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, Joseph E. (1973) ‘The Badly Behaved Economy with the Well- Behaved Production Function’, in Models of Economic Growth, edited by James A. Mirrlees and Nicholas H. Stern, pp. 117–37 (New York: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, Joseph E. (1974) ‘The Cambridge-Cambridge Controversy in the Theory of Capital: A View From New Haven: A Review Article’, Journal of Political Economy, 82 (July/August) pp. 893–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walras, Léon (1954)Elements of Pure Economics translated by William Jaffe (Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, Vivian and Gram, Harvey (1980) Classical and Neoclassical Theories of General Equilibrium (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Avi J. Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Università di Verona, Italy

    Mauro Baranzini (Professor of Economics) (Professor of Economics)

  2. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    G. C. Harcourt (Reader in the History of Economic Theory, Fellow of Jesus College, Professor Emeritus) (Reader in the History of Economic Theory, Fellow of Jesus College, Professor Emeritus)

  3. University of Adelaide, Australia

    G. C. Harcourt (Reader in the History of Economic Theory, Fellow of Jesus College, Professor Emeritus) (Reader in the History of Economic Theory, Fellow of Jesus College, Professor Emeritus)

Copyright information

© 1993 Mauro Baranzini and G. C. Harcourt

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cohen, A.J. (1993). Samuelson and the 93% Scarcity Theory of Value. In: Baranzini, M., Harcourt, G.C. (eds) The Dynamics of the Wealth of Nations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-22728-0_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation