IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijplur/v3y2012i1p40-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining neoclassical economists' pro-growth agenda: does the popular Solow growth model bias economic analysis?

Author

Listed:
  • Hendrik Van den Berg

Abstract

The Solow model concludes that long-run growth depends on technological progress, which is taken by neoclassical economists as suggesting there are no limits to growth because humanity's capacity to think and expand knowledge is unlimited. This paper develops a two-sector Solow model consisting of natural and economic sectors, and it demonstrates that continued rapid growth is not inevitable and an economic collapse is possible. The logical application of the Solow model thus does not provide a justification for continuing the energy-based technological change and economic growth we have experienced over the past two centuries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hendrik Van den Berg, 2012. "Explaining neoclassical economists' pro-growth agenda: does the popular Solow growth model bias economic analysis?," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 40-62.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijplur:v:3:y:2012:i:1:p:40-62
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=47472
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin L. Weitzman, 1999. "Pricing the Limits to Growth from Minerals Depletion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 691-706.
    2. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801, September.
    3. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    4. David Popp, 2004. "R&D Subsidies and Climate Policy: Is There a "Free Lunch"?," NBER Working Papers 10880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Harvey, David, 2007. "A Brief History of Neoliberalism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199283279.
    6. J. Daniel Khazzoom, 1980. "Economic Implications of Mandated Efficiency in Standards for Household Appliances," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 21-40.
    7. Nicholas Stern, 2008. "The Economics of Climate Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 1-37, May.
    8. Harty D. Saunders, 1992. "The Khazzoom-Brookes Postulate and Neoclassical Growth," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 131-148.
    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. Mantas Markauskas & Asta Baliute, 2021. "Technological progress spillover effect in Lithuanian manufacturing industry," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 16(4), pages 783-806, December.

    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. Gregory Casey, 2024. "Energy Efficiency and Directed Technical Change: Implications for Climate Change Mitigation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(1), pages 192-228.
    2. Cui, Cathy Xin & Ha, Soo Jung & Hanley, Nicholas & McGregor, Peter G & Turner, Karen & Yin, Ya Ping, 2011. "Productivity Growth, Decoupling and Pollution Leakage," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2011-13, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    3. Koerth-Baker, Maggie & Turner, Karen & De Fence, Janine & Xin Cui, Cathy, 2011. "The Rebound Effect: Some Questions Answered," SIRE Discussion Papers 2011-17, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    4. Sorrell, Steve, 2009. "Jevons' Paradox revisited: The evidence for backfire from improved energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1456-1469, April.
    5. Yingying Lu & David I. Stern, 2016. "Substitutability and the Cost of Climate Mitigation Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 81-107, May.
    6. Acheampong, Alex O. & Dzator, Janet & Dzator, Michael & Salim, Ruhul, 2022. "Unveiling the effect of transport infrastructure and technological innovation on economic growth, energy consumption and CO2 emissions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    8. Melissa Dell & Benjamin F. Jones & Benjamin A. Olken, 2014. "What Do We Learn from the Weather? The New Climate-Economy Literature," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(3), pages 740-798, September.
    9. George Halkos & Iacovos Psarianos, 2016. "Exploring the effect of including the environment in the neoclassical growth model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 18(3), pages 339-358, July.
    10. Luca Gerotto & Paolo Pellizzari, 2021. "A replication of Pindyck’s willingness to pay: on the efforts required to obtain results," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(5), pages 1-25, May.
    11. Zhou, Xiaoyan & Zhang, Jie & Li, Junpeng, 2013. "Industrial structural transformation and carbon dioxide emissions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 43-51.
    12. Lange, Steffen & Pohl, Johanna & Santarius, Tilman, 2020. "Digitalization and energy consumption. Does ICT reduce energy demand?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    13. Philippe Aghion & Antoine Dechezleprêtre & David Hémous & Ralf Martin & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Carbon Taxes, Path Dependency, and Directed Technical Change: Evidence from the Auto Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(1), pages 1-51.
    14. Lin, Boqiang & Liu, Xia, 2013. "Reform of refined oil product pricing mechanism and energy rebound effect for passenger transportation in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 329-337.
    15. Karen Turner, 2013. ""Rebound" Effects from Increased Energy Efficiency: A Time to Pause and Reflect," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    16. Johansson, R. & Meyer, S. & Whistance, J. & Thompson, W. & Debnath, D., 2020. "Greenhouse gas emission reduction and cost from the United States biofuels mandate," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    17. Ouyang, Xiaoling & Gao, Beiying & Du, Kerui & Du, Gang, 2018. "Industrial sectors' energy rebound effect: An empirical study of Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 408-416.
    18. Turner, Karen, 2009. "Negative rebound and disinvestment effects in response to an improvement in energy efficiency in the UK economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 648-666, September.
    19. Pindyck, Robert S., 2012. "Uncertain outcomes and climate change policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 289-303.
    20. Christian Flachsland & Robert Marschinski & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2009. "To link or not to link: benefits and disadvantages of linking cap-and-trade systems," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 358-372, July.

    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:ids:ijplur:v:3:y:2012:i:1:p:40-62. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=319 .

    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.