{"title":"临时平衡法:希克斯对希克斯","authors":"M. de Vroey","doi":"10.1080/09672560600708318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Hicks is renowned for having introduced the temporary equilibrium framework in his book Value and Capital. Subsequently, however, he partially recanted this framework by rejecting the market clearing idea while still keeping the week device. The aim of this paper is to assess whether this change was right. My answer will be broadly negative. To make my point, I will ponder on the meaning and implications of the week device, assess the validity of Hicks' claim that slow adjustment can cause market rationing, examine his claim that the possibility of market clearing depends on the prevailing market form and, finally, assess his twofold filiations towards Marshall and Walras.","PeriodicalId":51791,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","volume":"13 1","pages":"259 - 278"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2006-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09672560600708318","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The temporary equilibrium method: Hicks against Hicks\",\"authors\":\"M. de Vroey\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09672560600708318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Hicks is renowned for having introduced the temporary equilibrium framework in his book Value and Capital. Subsequently, however, he partially recanted this framework by rejecting the market clearing idea while still keeping the week device. The aim of this paper is to assess whether this change was right. My answer will be broadly negative. To make my point, I will ponder on the meaning and implications of the week device, assess the validity of Hicks' claim that slow adjustment can cause market rationing, examine his claim that the possibility of market clearing depends on the prevailing market form and, finally, assess his twofold filiations towards Marshall and Walras.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"259 - 278\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09672560600708318\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09672560600708318\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09672560600708318","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The temporary equilibrium method: Hicks against Hicks
Abstract Hicks is renowned for having introduced the temporary equilibrium framework in his book Value and Capital. Subsequently, however, he partially recanted this framework by rejecting the market clearing idea while still keeping the week device. The aim of this paper is to assess whether this change was right. My answer will be broadly negative. To make my point, I will ponder on the meaning and implications of the week device, assess the validity of Hicks' claim that slow adjustment can cause market rationing, examine his claim that the possibility of market clearing depends on the prevailing market form and, finally, assess his twofold filiations towards Marshall and Walras.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought (EJHET), a peer-reviewed journal, has quickly established itself as a leading forum for lively discussion on a wide range of issues in the history of economic thought. With contributions from both established international scholars and younger academics, EJHET is entirely pluralist and non-partisan with regard to subjects and methodologies - it does not subscribe to any particular current of thought, nor relate to any one geographic zone. The Managing Editors and Editorial Board and Advisory Board members are drawn from throughout Europe and beyond, and are committed to encouraging scholars from around the world to contribute to international research and debate.