{"title":"论多部门多技术模型、生产函数与古德温循环:对利布曼的回复","authors":"Robert A. Blecker, M. Setterfield","doi":"10.4337/ejeep.2020.03.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emiliano Libman's constructive comments on our recent book, Heterodox Macroeconomics: Models of Demand, Distribution and Growth (HM), raise three main points of contention: the suitability of single-sector/single-technique (as opposed to multi-sector/multi-technique) models; the appropriate choice of production function; and the distinction between limit cycles and closed orbits as representations of Goodwinian dynamics. In this reply, we respond to Libman's critique in a manner that is designed to develop his arguments into a useful addendum to our book. In so doing, we hope that this exchange will engage interested students and other readers in issues and avenues of inquiry that lie beyond some of the first-pass simplifications in HM.","PeriodicalId":44368,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On multi-sector and multi-technique models, production functions and Goodwin cycles: a reply to Libman\",\"authors\":\"Robert A. Blecker, M. Setterfield\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/ejeep.2020.03.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Emiliano Libman's constructive comments on our recent book, Heterodox Macroeconomics: Models of Demand, Distribution and Growth (HM), raise three main points of contention: the suitability of single-sector/single-technique (as opposed to multi-sector/multi-technique) models; the appropriate choice of production function; and the distinction between limit cycles and closed orbits as representations of Goodwinian dynamics. In this reply, we respond to Libman's critique in a manner that is designed to develop his arguments into a useful addendum to our book. In so doing, we hope that this exchange will engage interested students and other readers in issues and avenues of inquiry that lie beyond some of the first-pass simplifications in HM.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2020.03.03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2020.03.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
On multi-sector and multi-technique models, production functions and Goodwin cycles: a reply to Libman
Emiliano Libman's constructive comments on our recent book, Heterodox Macroeconomics: Models of Demand, Distribution and Growth (HM), raise three main points of contention: the suitability of single-sector/single-technique (as opposed to multi-sector/multi-technique) models; the appropriate choice of production function; and the distinction between limit cycles and closed orbits as representations of Goodwinian dynamics. In this reply, we respond to Libman's critique in a manner that is designed to develop his arguments into a useful addendum to our book. In so doing, we hope that this exchange will engage interested students and other readers in issues and avenues of inquiry that lie beyond some of the first-pass simplifications in HM.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) is a peer-reviewed journal which serves as a forum for studies in macroeconomic theory, economic institutions and economic policies. The managing editors aim for productive debates involving one or more variants of heterodox economics, and invite contributions acknowledging the pluralism of research approaches. The submission of both theoretical and empirical work is encouraged. The managing editors contend that a wide variety of institutional and social factors shape economic life and economic processes. Only a careful study and integration of such factors into economics will lead to theoretical progress and to competent economic policy recommendations. This was clearly demonstrated by the inadequacy of orthodox economics, based on neoclassical foundations, to provide suitable explanations and responses to recent financial and economic crises.