IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v22y1998i4p449-61.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Difficulty of Evolutionary Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mayhew, Anne

Abstract

Thorstein Veblen's 100-year-old question--'Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?'--remains relevant. Evolutionary analysis, even for those social scientists who trace their intellectual heritage to evolutionary thought, has been difficult for three reasons: effective incorporation of time requires a respectful and detailed treatment of the past; dominant social science paradigms have made it difficult to account for novelty; and concern with policy and current issues of social debate creates a tendency towards taxonomy. The twentieth-century history of economic anthropology and institutional economics illustrates that a failure to overcome these difficulties leaves Veblen's vision unfulfilled. Copyright 1998 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Mayhew, Anne, 1998. "On the Difficulty of Evolutionary Analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 22(4), pages 449-461, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:22:y:1998:i:4:p:449-61
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Viano Francesca Lidia, 2002. "Guesswork and knowledge in evolutionary economics: verblen revisited," CESMEP Working Papers 200205, University of Turin.
    2. Tae‐Hee Jo, 2011. "Social Provisioning Process and Socio‐Economic Modeling," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(5), pages 1094-1116, November.
    3. Tae-Hee Jo, 2021. "A Veblenian Critique of Nelson and Winter’s Evolutionary Theory," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(4), pages 1101-1117, October.
    4. Jo, Tae-Hee, 2013. "Uncertainty, Instability, and the Control of Markets," MPRA Paper 47936, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2015. "From equilibrium to autopoiesis: A Luhmannian reading of Veblenian evolutionary economics," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 143-155.

    More about this item

    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:oup:cambje:v:22:y:1998:i:4:p:449-61. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.