Economics in Crisis: Severe and Logical Contradictions of Classical, Keynesian, and Popular Trade Models

The paper examines three popular models that form the foundation of modern economics. The author concludes that two of the three, the classical and the Keynesian, are seriously deficient in logic, whereas the third, dealing with gains from trade, is partially lacking in logic. Classical and neo–Keynesian approaches require desired investment to expand during recessions, whereas the trade model requires real GDP to rise without any rise in employment, capital stock, or technology. The paper offers an alternative macro framework that is free from the limitations of conventional models. Money is either neutral or non–neutral, depending on whether the economy is operating below or at full capacity. Wages are strictly determined in the labor market, yet employment is influenced by aggregate demand. The alternative model thus combines the attractive features of classical and Keynesian frameworks.     

Imports in Keynesian Models*

This paper examines two main problems relating to the introduction of imports in the simple Keynesian model. First, imports need to be made a function of the aggregate demand components rather than income. Second, unless one assumes that intermediate imports are zero the solution of the simple Keynesian model will provide miltipliers which Overstate the exogenous demand change for domestic product.     

试论凯恩斯经济学研究方法的新取向

随着主流凯恩斯主义经济学的流行，原创性的凯恩斯经济学实际上已经“夭折”了，它的革命思想并没有得到真正的阐发与传播。从范式角度比较和分析原创性凯恩斯经济学和三个凯恩斯经济学流派之间的本质关系后发现，后凯恩斯经济学对原创性凯恩斯经济学的研究提供了重要启示；但是后凯恩斯经济学的理论局限性说明，必须探索一种新的研究方法，即一种制度的演化的经济学范式，从而推动凯恩斯经济学的进一步发展。     

The Fall and Rise of Keynesian Economics*

Keynesian economics came under much criticism in the 1970s This paper argues that the decline in Keynesian economics and the rise in, notably, new classical economics in this period related to their respective theoretical appeal rather than their ability to explain developments in the macroeconomy. As this has become increasingly recognized, and with the development of sound microeconomic foundations, Keynesian economics has again been on the rise.     

马克思主义与后凯恩斯主义经济增长理论比较研究*——从经济增长基本方程说起

本文从设定经济增长基本方程出发，探讨了马克思主义与后凯恩斯主义经济学构建闭合增长模型的不同思路，进而对两种增长理论进行详细的比较分析。研究发现，马克思主义与后凯恩斯主义增长理论都对收入分配给予了特别的关注，并且都坚持阶级、制度、非均衡的分析方法；然而，两者在所依据的理论基础、经济增长的最终决定因素、资本主义经济增长是否存在极限以及增长过程中的市场结构等问题上仍存在明显分歧。与后凯恩斯主义增长理论相比，马克思主义增长理论在理论基础、研究视阈及内在逻辑一致性等方面都更具优势。全面比较马克思主义与后凯恩斯主义经济增长理论对于构建中国特色发展经济学具有重要的借鉴意义。     

The breakdown of the IS–LM synthesis: implications for post-Keynesian economic theory

The monetarist and the new classical economics attack routed the IS–LM version of Keynesian theory and the large scale econometric models from the centre of macroeconomic research. However monetarism and the new classical economics were more successful as a critique of the IS–LM orthodoxy than as a basis for fruitful research and policy analysis.

Post-Keynesian economists also attack the IS–LM orthodoxy, mainly because it misspecified ‘… the economic society in which we actually live’. Post-Keynesians that emphasized financial and labour markets argued that properties of the real world economy made instability normal results ofmarket interactions.

The vacuum in main line theory that developed as the shortcomings of monetarism became evident led to a revival of interest in basic Keynesian propositions. This has spawned what is now labeled a new Keynesian economics. New Keynesian economists conform to the modeling standards set by the new classical rational expectations school but claim to get Keynesian results. To a degree these results are compatible with propositions of post-Keynesian economics.

It is suggested that a convergence between the new and the post-Keynesian economics can be expected, and the result is likely to be fruitful.     

凯恩斯经济学方法的科学哲学评价

主流经济学在凯恩斯经济学形成之后,一直存在着争论,如何理解凯恩斯经济学理论的真谛,是当前研究现代经济学一个值得关注的问题,而在理解凯恩斯经济学理论中有关他的研究方法的哲学思想内涵是方法论的根本,也是构成其经济学理论的重要组成部分。本文以凯恩斯的《通论》为基础,分析凯恩斯经济学方法的哲学基础,并在方法论意义上进行了评价。分析结果表明,对于凯恩斯经济学的理解应当以全面发展的眼光看待,宏观经济学只是其理论起源的一个方面,追求经济思维的合理性和适应人类经济活动的需要是凯恩斯经济学方法论的根本。     

Engagement with the Mainstream in the Future of Post Keynesian Economics

This paper examines the reasons for the difficulties Post Keynesian economics has had in supplanting mainstream neoclassical theory and for its resulting marginalization. Three explanations are given: intellectual, sociological and political, where the latter two are largely responsible for the current relationship of Post Keynesian economics to the mainstream. The paper also reviews various strategies for improving the future of Post Keynesian economics, including a focus on methodological issues by maintaining an ‘open systems’ approach; a strategy of ‘embattled survival’; the development of a positive alternative to mainstream economics; a strategy of ‘constructive engagement’ with the mainstream; and a dialogue with policymakers. While the global financial crisis has increased the potential for constructive engagement with the mainstream, significant barriers remain to the effectiveness of this approach. The crisis has, however, enhanced the possibility of engaging directly with policymakers and gaining a greater role in management education.     

Shocking the eurozone

In this paper, the monetary transmission mechanism within the European Monetary Union is investigated. The impulse response functions and forecast error variance decompositions of a structural vector error correction model (SVECM) are compared with those of a New Keynesian theoretical model. The identifying restrictions of the SVECM are directly derived from the theoretical model. Two permanent shocks are identified, one having only nominal, and one having only real effects. The three transitory shocks comprise a short-term interest-rate shock, an aggregate demand shock and a money demand shock. The main conclusions are that permanently reducing the inflation objective depresses output in the first year, but has no real effects in the long run. Regarding output variability, the results indicate that aggregate demand shocks are most important during the first year, after which aggregate supply shocks dominate.     

Ecological macroeconomics: An application to climate change

Ecological economics has not paid sufficient attention to the macroeconomic level both in terms of theory and modeling. Yet, key topics debated in the field of ecological economics such as sustainable consumption, reduction in working time, the degrowth debate, the energy–exergy link, and the rebound effect require a holistic and macro perspective. While this deficiency has been identified before and Keynesian economics has been generally suggested as a potent vehicle to establish economic systemic thinking, very little concrete theorizing and practical suggestions have been put forward. We give further credence to this suggestion and demonstrate the value of tackling key concerns of ecological economics within a Keynesian growth framework. Contextualized by an application to climate change we suggest that policy relevant recommendations need to be based on a consistent view of the macroeconomy. We end with laying out key building blocks for a Keynesian model framework for an ecological macroeconomics.     

Financial constraints and unemployment equilibrium

The aim of this paper is to show that a robust determination of unemployment equilibria can be based on the integration of credit rationing into a general equilibrium model. We first review some of the Keynesian macroeconomic models. We show that the problems bequeathed by Keynes’ legacy are only partially solved by the strand of the new Keynesian economics based on market imperfections and endogenous rigidities. In order to overcome these problems we refer to credit rationing. In particular, we build a simple general equilibrium model in which prices are–in principle–perfectly flexible and credit rationing implies unemployment equilibria.     

The relationship among money supply, banking lending and aggregate demand in China: 1994–2006

Based on the framework of Bernanke & Blinader (1988) and Walsh (2003), this paper provides a concise analysis for relationship among money supply, banking lending and aggregate demand; and makes an empirical test on relationship among China’s money supply, banking lending and aggregate demand from 1994 to 2006 by adopting the single-equation regressive model and vector autoregressive model in terms of Keynesian structural model and monetarism simplified model. The result shows that money supply and banking lending have both played a driving role on real economy. Because of non-market interest rates, Keynesian structural model cannot explain the transmission mechanism of China monetary policies better than monetarism simplified model. __________ Translated from Jingji kexue 经济科学 (Economic Science), 2008, (1): 5–15     

凯恩斯主义的理论缺陷及其新的发展

20世纪最具影响力的凯恩斯经济学理论很长时间内一直是西方国家制定经济政策的理论依据,但上世纪70年代以后,由于西方国家普遍出现经济滞胀,凯恩斯主义陷入困境,走向衰落。论述了凯恩斯主义对传统经济学的重大突破及其贡献,指出了凯恩斯主义自身的理论缺陷,阐述了新凯恩斯主义的理论前提及其特征,并分析了新凯恩斯主义经济政策的主要特点。     

Keynes against Kalecki on economic method

In the past twenty years, there has been considerable debate on the “coherence” of post Keynesian economics, in view of post Keynesian economists’ ambitions to develop a paradigmatic alternative to neoclassical economics. Given the growing importance of methodological aspects in this discussion, this article addresses the differences of approach to economic theory between the fathers of the two most important strands in post Keynesian economics. We thus focus on Keynes’s criticism of Kalecki’s theory of the business cycle and the tensions between Keynes’s logical approach and Kaleki’s formal modeling. We show that in criticizing Kalecki’s theory, Keynes made use of the same methodological criticism (based on detecting logical fallacies in reasoning) he had employed to attack both the classical theory and contemporary “pseudo-mathematical” models. After illustrating these fundamental differences between Keynes and Kalecki about the proper way of doing economics, we draw some conclusions on the possible future evolution of post Keynesian economics.     

Demand-led Growth Theory: A Historical Approach

This paper builds upon the Keynesian theory of demand-led growth in order to provide an analytical framework for explaining economic growth and development in concrete terms, consistent with the fundamental idea that growth in output and employment is determined by the growth in aggregate demand. The framework employs a historical approach to identify the main factors and their role in explaining demand-led growth and the accumulation process. The theoretical model developed abandons steady-state conditions by proposing that capacity utilisation varies in the long run as well as in the short run to ensure output has the elasticity to accommodate levels of autonomous demand free of any capacity saving constraint. On the basis of our analytical framework, the paper considers the main factors that explain the growth in aggregate demand: first, by examining the variables that determine the ‘super-multiplier’ and what social, institutional and technical conditions can cause its value to change over time; second, by identifying the components of autonomous demand and the main forces explaining their growth; and third, by considering the manner in which technical progress promotes demand-led growth.     

Comments

This paper argues for a fundamental reorientation of fiscal policy from the current aggregate demand management model to a model that explicitly and directly targets the unemployed. Some advantages notwithstanding, aggregate demand management has a number of serious drawbacks that merit its reconsideration. This paper identifies these shortcomings and builds the case for a targeted demand management approach that can deliver economic stabilization through full employment and better income distribution. This approach is consistent with the original Keynesian policy recommendations and offers a reinterpretation of Keynes's proposal for the modern context with the help of the work of Hyman Minsky.     

The Role of Demand in Macroeconomics

I argue that the standard approach represented by real business cycle theory is misguided, and that a fundamentally different approach is necessary. The new approach, based on the method of statistical mechanics, leads us to a new concept of “equilibrium”. In equilibrium we must have a distribution of productivities rather than a unique level of productivity. We then find that demand plays a crucial role in the determination of the aggregate output, as the old Keynesian economics claims. I show that the demand constraint is important not only in short‐run but also in long‐run economic growth.     

Fixed price equilibria in a multifirm model

In a simple temperary equilibrium model with three commodities (labour, goods and money) and two sectors, there are different firms, each having its own production function. There now exist four types of fixed price equilibria (Keynesian, classical, repressed inflation, undercounsumption). In the last type, consumers are not rationed, some producers are rationed on the goods market, and other producers on the labour market. There exist three different aggregate production functions, that have to be applied in Keynesian, classical, and repressed inflation situations respectively. For the fourth case no aggregate production function exists.     

A graphical representation of an estimated DSGE model

We write a New Keynesian model as an aggregate demand curve and an aggregate supply curve, relating inflation to output growth. The graphical representation shows how structural shocks move aggregate demand and supply simultaneously. We estimate the curves on US data from 1948 to 2010 and study two recessions: the 2001 recession and the Great Recession of 2008–2009. The Great Recession is explained by a collapse of aggregate demand driven by adverse preference and permanent technology shocks, and expectations of low inflation.     

To Save or to Consume: Linking Growth Theory with the Keynesian Model

In the neoclassical growth theory, higher saving rate gives rise to higher output per capita. However, in the Keynesian model, higher saving rate causes lower consumption, which may lead to a recession. Students may ask, "Should we save or should we consume?" In most of the macroeconomics textbooks, economic growth and Keynesian economics are in separate, sometimes unsequential, chapters. The connection between the short run and the long run is not apparent. The author builds a bridge between the neoclassical growth theory and the Keynesian model. He links the Solow diagram and the IS-LM curves and depicts the short-run to long-run transition of the economy after changes in saving and other macroeconomic policies.