IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pal/palchp/978-0-230-37121-7_13.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Conclusion

In: Cambridge and the Monetary Theory of Production

Author

Listed:
  • Robert J. Bigg

Abstract

The main thesis of this book is that the collapse of the Marshallian research programme was due to an inherent split in the very make-up of the programme itself. Marshall’s contribution to the state of political economy in the late nineteenth century was considerable (see, for example, Deane, 1989, pp. 134–41), but it was also essentially a compromise: by drawing together and reconciling many of the different strands of political economy Marshall’s framework helped weld economics into a distinct and separate discipline (the methodological issues being dealt with at much the same time by Keynes’s father, John Neville, in his Scope and Method of Political Economy first published in 1890 — see Deane, 1983). The cost of the compromise was that not all the problems could actually be resolved into a single framework and some cracks were thus papered over.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert J. Bigg, 1990. "Conclusion," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Cambridge and the Monetary Theory of Production, chapter 13, pages 185-194, Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palchp:978-0-230-37121-7_13
    DOI: 10.1057/9780230371217_13
    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.

    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:pal:palchp:978-0-230-37121-7_13. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave.com .

    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.