IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/elg/ejeepi/v17y2020i3p295-306.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On multi-sector and multi-technique models, production functions and Goodwin cycles: a reply to Libman

Author

Listed:
  • Robert A. Blecker

    (Professor of Economics, American University, Washington, DC, USA)

  • Mark Setterfield

    (Professor of Economics, The New School for Social Research, New York, USA)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert A. Blecker & Mark Setterfield, 2020. "On multi-sector and multi-technique models, production functions and Goodwin cycles: a reply to Libman," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 17(3), pages 295-306, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:ejeepi:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p295-306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/journals/ejeep/17-3/ejeep.2020.03.03.xml
    Download Restriction: Restricted Access
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert A. Blecker, 2016. "Wage-led versus profit-led demand regimes: the long and the short of it," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 4(4), pages 373-390, October.
    2. Emiliano Libman, 2020. "A Note on “Heterodox Macroeconomics” by Blecker and Setterfield," Working Papers 2010, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    3. E. Stockhammere & J. Michell, 2017. "Pseudo-Goodwin cycles in a Minsky model," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 41(1), pages 105-125.
    4. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    5. Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720.
    6. Charpe, Matthieu & Bridji, Slim & Mcadam, Peter, 2020. "Labor Share And Growth In The Long Run," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(7), pages 1720-1757, October.
    7. Heilbroner,Robert L. & Milberg,William S., 1996. "The Crisis of Vision in Modern Economic Thought," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521497145.
    8. Shaikh, Anwar, 2016. "Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199390632.
    9. Harvie, David, 2000. "Testing Goodwin: Growth Cycles in Ten OECD Countries," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(3), pages 349-376, May.
    10. Araujo, Ricardo Azevedo & Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Moreira, Helmar Nunes, 2019. "Some new insights on the empirics of Goodwin's growth-cycle model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 42-54.
    11. Kurz,Heinz D. & Salvadori,Neri, 1995. "Theory of Production," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521443258.
    12. David Kiefer & Codrina Rada, 2015. "Profit maximising goes global: the race to the bottom," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 39(5), pages 1333-1350.
    13. Ros, Jaime, 2013. "Rethinking Economic Development, Growth, and Institutions," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199684816.
    14. Ben Zipperer & Peter Skott, 2011. "Cyclical patterns of employment, utilization, and profitability," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 25-58.
    15. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    16. Ricardo Azevedo Araujo & Gilberto Tadeu Lima, 2007. "A structural economic dynamics approach to balance-of-payments-constrained growth," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(5), pages 755-774, September.
    17. Harcourt,G. C., 1972. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521096720.
    18. Skott,Peter, 2008. "Conflict and Effective Demand in Economic Growth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521066310.
    19. Joan Robinson, 1975. "The Unimportance of Reswitching," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 89(1), pages 32-39.
    20. Skott,Peter, 1989. "Conflict and Effective Demand in Economic Growth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521365963.
    21. José Barrales & Rudiger von Arnim, 2017. "Longer-run distributive cycles: wavelet decompositions for the US, 1948–2011," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 196-217, April.
    22. Kurz,Heinz D. & Salvadori,Neri, 1997. "Theory of Production," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521588676.
    23. A. P. Thirlwall, 2013. "Economic Growth in an Open Developing Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15208.
    24. Nelson H. Barbosa‐Filho & Lance Taylor, 2006. "Distributive And Demand Cycles In The Us Economy—A Structuralist Goodwin Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 389-411, July.
    25. Emiliano Libman, 2020. "A note on Heterodox Macroeconomics by Blecker and Setterfield," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 17(3), pages 286–294-2, November.
    26. Heilbroner,Robert L. & Milberg,William S., 1996. "The Crisis of Vision in Modern Economic Thought," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521497749.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gustavo Pereira Serra, 2024. "(Trying to) Catch Up with the Higher-Skilled Joneses: Student loans in a segmented educational market from a Post-Keynesian perspective," Working Papers 2412, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    2. Gustavo Pereira Serra, 2021. "The First Harrod Problem and Human Capital Formation," Working Papers 2113, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mark Setterfield, 2023. "Whatever Happened to the ‘Goodwin Pattern’? Profit Squeeze Dynamics in the Modern American Labour Market," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 263-286, January.
    2. Araujo, Ricardo Azevedo & Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Moreira, Helmar Nunes, 2019. "Some new insights on the empirics of Goodwin's growth-cycle model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 42-54.
    3. Daniele Tavani, 2023. "The Classical Model of Growth and Distribution," Working Papers 2311, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    4. Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Sordi, Serena, 2019. "Distributive cycles and endogenous technical change in a BoPC growth model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 216-233.
    5. Jose Barrales‐Ruiz & Ivan Mendieta‐Muñoz & Codrina Rada & Daniele Tavani & Rudiger von Arnim, 2022. "The distributive cycle: Evidence and current debates," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 468-503, April.
    6. Roberto Veneziani & Luca Zamparelli & Amitava Krishna Dutt, 2017. "Heterodox Theories Of Economic Growth And Income Distribution: A Partial Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 1240-1271, December.
    7. Stamegna, Marco, 2022. "Induced innovation, the distributive cycle, and the changing pattern of labour productivity cyclicality: a SVAR analysis for the US economy," MPRA Paper 113855, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Eckhard Hein, 2017. "Post-Keynesian macroeconomics since the mid 1990s: main developments," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 14(2), pages 131-172, September.
    9. J. Barkley Rosser, 2020. "Austrian themes and the Cambridge capital theory controversies," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 415-431, December.
    10. Robert A Blecker & Michael Cauvel & Y K Kim, 2022. "Systems estimation of a structural model of distribution and demand in the US economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 46(2), pages 391-420.
    11. Stefan Ederer & Miriam Rehm, 2021. "Wealth inequality and aggregate demand," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 405-424, May.
    12. Rudiger von Arnim & Jose Barrales, 2015. "Demand-driven Goodwin cycles with Kaldorian and Kaleckian features," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 3(3), pages 351-373, July.
    13. Mark Setterfield & George Wheaton, 2024. "Animal spirits and the Goodwin pattern," Working Papers 2407, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    14. Mariolis Theodore & Konstantakis Konstantinos N. & Michaelides Panayotis G. & Tsionas Efthymios G., 2019. "A non-linear Keynesian Goodwin-type endogenous model of the cycle: Bayesian evidence for the USA," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Michael Cauvel, 2019. "The neo-Goodwinian model reconsidered," Working Papers PKWP1915, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    16. Rada, Codrina & Tavani, Daniele & von Arnim, Rudiger & Zamparelli, Luca, 2023. "Classical and Keynesian models of inequality and stagnation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 442-461.
    17. Jamee K. Moudud, 2010. "Strategic Competition, Dynamics, and the Role of the State," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4241.
    18. Santetti, Marcio & Nikiforos, Michalis & von Arnim, Rudiger, 2024. "Growth, cycles, and residential investment," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 313-327.
    19. David Kiefer & Ivan Mendieta-Muñoz & Codrina Rada & Rudiger von Arnim, 2020. "Secular Stagnation and Income Distribution Dynamics," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 52(2), pages 189-207, June.
    20. Jose Barrales-Ruiz, Ivan Mendieta-Muñoz, Codrina Rada, Daniele Tavani, Rudiger von Arnim, 2020. "The distributive cycle: Evidence and current debates," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2020_07, University of Utah, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    choice of technique; production functions; Goodwin cycles; multi-sectoral models; technological change; factor substitution;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E11 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Marxian; Sraffian; Kaleckian
    • E12 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Keynes; Keynesian; Post-Keynesian; Modern Monetary Theory
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • B51 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Socialist; Marxian; Sraffian
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:elg:ejeepi:v:17:y:2020:i:3:p295-306. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Phillip Thompson (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elgaronline.com/ejeep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.