Generalized Goodwin’s Theorems on General Coordinates



This paper is concerned with providing foundations for the use of general coordinates in linear production systems, which Professor R. M. Goodwin originally proposed. The actually observed sectors of the Sraffa–Leontief system have bilateral relations to each other, which leads to complexities in analyzing prices or quantities. In the case that it is impossible to proceed with analysis directly in the original space, we may turn to an imaginary space, which is tractable, as long as the original space corresponds uniquely to the imaginary one adopted. This is a natural way for mathematics to proceed. Goodwin’s use of the method of general coordinates represents a “diffeomorphisrn” in this area of economic theory. The use of general coordinates in the Sraffa–Leontief system seems, at first glance, restrictive, since their use requires a diagonalizable input matrix. A mathematical meaning of diagonalizability (or the rank condition) is examined by means of linear perturbation. The eigenvalues of the linear perturbed system are seen to be distinct almost everywhere. Economic meaning is given to the diagonalizable input matrix as yielding a regular system. It is worth noting that this specification can be justified in essentially the same way as the notion of quasi-smoothness used by Mas-Colell in the neoclassical production set. As a by-product of this study, the perturbed version of the Sraffa–Leontief price system is analysed.


Price System Input Matrix Principal Eigenvalue Linear Perturbation Regular System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aruka Y (1987) Generalized Goodwin’s theorem in the linear multisectoral model. Research Papers No. 9. The Institute of Business Research, Chuo University (Presented at the Far Eastern Meeting of the Econometric Society, Tokyo, Japan)Google Scholar
  2. Aruka Y (1988) General coordinates and price dynamics in the multisectoral model. Research Papers No. 11. The Institute of Business Research, Chuo University (Presented at the Australasian Meeting of the Econometric Society, Canberra, Australia)Google Scholar
  3. Aruka Y (1989) Perturbed version of the Leontief price system and the Nash equilibrium. Research Papers No. 13. The Institute of Business Research, Chuo UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. Aruka Y (1990) Perturbation theorems on the linear production model and some properties of eigenprices. Working Paper in Economics and Econometrics, Australian National University, No. 203Google Scholar
  5. Benavie A (1972) Mathematical techniques for economic analysis. Prcntice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  6. Blatt JM (1983) Dynamic economic systems. M.E. Sharpe, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Dietzenbacher E (1988) Perturbations of matrices: a theorem on the Perron vector and its applications to input-output models. J Econ 48:389–412Google Scholar
  8. Gantmacher FR (1959) The theory of matrices, vol I. Chelsea, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodwin RM (1953) Static and dynamic linear general equilibrium models. In: Netherlands Economic Institute (ed) Input–output relations. Netherlands Economic Institute, The Netherlands (also reprinted in Goodwin 1983a)Google Scholar
  10. Goodwin RM (1976) Use of normalized general coordinates in linear value and distribution theory. In: Polenske K and Skolka J (eds) Advances in input–output analysis (also reprinted in Goodwin 1983a)Google Scholar
  11. Goodwin RM (1983a) Essays in linear economic structures. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Goodwin RM (1983b) Capital theory in orthogonalised general coordinates. In: Essays in linear economic structures. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodwin RM (1983c) Disaggregating models of fluctuating growth. In: Goodwin RM, Krueger M, Vercelli A (eds) Nonlinear models of fluctuating growth. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodwin RM (1986) Swinging along the Turnpike with von Neumann and Sraffa. Camb J Econ 10:203–210Google Scholar
  15. Goodwin RM, Punzo LF (1987) The dynamics of a capitalist society. Polity, Basil Blackwell, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Kan T, Iri M (1982) Jordan Hyojunkei (Jordan Normal Forms). University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  17. Kato T (1982) A short introduction to perturbation theory for linear operators. Springer, NewYorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klein E (1973) Mathematical methods in theoretical economics. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Koyarik ZV, Sherif N (1985) Perturbation of invariant subspaces. Linear Algebra Appl 64:93–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mas-Colell A (1985) The theory of general economic equilibrium: a differential approach. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. McKenzie L (1960) Matrices with dominant diagonals and economic theory. In: Arrow KJ, Karlln S, Suppes P (eds) Mathematical methods in the social sciences 1959. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Miyao T (1977) Generalization of Sraffa’s standard commodity and its complete characterization. Int Econ Rev 18:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nikaido H (1968) Convex structures and economic theory. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Satake I (1974) Senkei Daisugaku (Linear algebra). Shokabo, Tokyo (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  25. Schefold B (1976) Relative prices as a function of the rate of profit. Zeitschrift fuer Nationaloekonomie 36:21–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schefold B (1978) On counting equations. Zeitschrift fuer Nationaloekonomie 38:253–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Seneta E (1981) Non-negative matrices and Markov chains, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Sraffa P (1960) Production of commodities by means of commodities. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Strang G (1980) Linear algebra and its applications, 2nd edn. Academic, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  30. Wilkinson JH (1965) The algebraic eigenvalue problem. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of CommerceChuo UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations