The economic contributions of Paul Sweezy

This paper offers a critical appraisal of the work of Paul M. Sweezy (1910-2004). After a brief biographical summary, the following sections deal with Sweezy's early writings; his book, The Theory of Capitalist Development; his thinking on socialism; his contribution as an historian of events and of ideas; the Monopoly Capital, co-authored with Paul Baran; and Sweezy's work after the death of Baran in 1964. The paper concludes with an assessment of Sweezy's significance, and a comprehensive bibliography of his writings.     

A proposal for more sophisticated normative principles in introductory economics

Introductory textbooks teach a simple normative story about the importance of maximizing economic surplus that supports common policy claims. There is little defense of the claim that maximizing surplus is normatively important, which is not obvious to non-economists. Difficulties with the claim that society should maximize surplus are generally not addressed. Economists are thus frequently criticized by non-economists for having a poor moral foundation for our normative claims. We should tell a more sophisticated normative story that justifies the moral importance of surplus, but acknowledges that other moral values may conflict with generating surplus and that distribution is not always separable from efficiency. This would allow students to make more compelling arguments in favor of normative positions they accept, regardless of the values they hold.     

Marx,Sraffa, and Surplus: Observations Prompted by Garegnani (2018)

ABSTRACT

In a posthumously published article, Pierangelo Garegnani (2018. ‘On the Labour Theory of Value in Marx and in the Marxist Tradition.’) depicts Marx’s project in Capital as that of ‘developing systematically the theory of Ricardo and [the] implications of social conflict’ implied by Ricardo’s ‘surplus approach to value and distribution’. This paper argues to the contrary that Marx’s theory of surplus value and exploitation differs from (neo-)Ricardian surplus theory in fundamental ways, and modifies Garegnani’s simple Sraffian model to illustrate the distinctive implications of Marx’s theory.     

The Efficiency of China's Banking Industry and the Determinants

The recent global financial crisis highlights the importance of a sound financial sector for economic development. This paper evaluates the economic efficiency of China's banking industry and investigates the determinants of this efficiency. Our analysis shows that the average economic efficiency of joint-stock commercial banks is highest, followed by the ‘Big Four’ state-owned commercial banks and city commercial banks. The economic inefficiency of these banks during the past 15 years was mainly caused by technical inefficiency, and this technical inefficiency was mainly caused by scale inefficiency. Using the scores of efficiency as dependent variables, the paper also comprehensively studies the impact of (1) the characteristics of individual banks, (2) the characteristics of the whole banking industry and (3) macroeconomic factors on banking efficiency. The results suggest a number of factors that banks can work on to improve efficiency and lend support to deepening reforms in the Chinese banking industry, including regulatory reforms that require capital adequacy in a more strict way, reforms that introduce more competition and, more broadly, reforms that aim at establishing institutions that can truly commercialize Chinese banks. Last but not least, the efficiency of banking depends on healthy growth of the overall economy.     

Poverty: A Concept that is Both Absolute and Relative Because Human Beings are at Once Individual and Social

If we confine attention to the inner dynamics of advanced monopoly capitalism, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the prospect … would be the spread of increasingly severe psychic disorders leading to the impairment and eventual breakdown of the system's ability to function even on its own terms — Paul Baran and Paul Sweezy Pareto optimality is faint praise indeed — A. K. Sen     

Adolph Wagner’s economic thought in Brazil: money and public finance in the turn of the 20th century

This paper addresses the dissemination of German economist Adolph Wagner’s ideas in Brazil. It shows that his monetary thinking, inspired by Thomas Tooke and the Banking School, as well as his ideas on public finance, particularly the law of increasing state spending, were assimilated by two Brazilian economic thinkers: Rui Barbosa and Vieira Souto. The way these policymakers incorporated Wagner’s ideas into their texts and the arguments with which they chose to engage show the kind of economic discourse they were shaping in Brazil. This analysis reveals the different functions that the original ideas could perform in another national context.     

Surplus Value Production and Realization in Marxian Theory – Applications to the U.S., 1990–2015

ABSTRACT

Marx's Capital shows that surplus value can be produced in one industry, yet realized as profit (and possibly revenue) by other industries over the course of circulation. This paper highlights the separation between surplus value production and realization in Marx's work, and develops a new method for estimating surplus value production at the industry level to trace out transfers of surplus value across industries. The framework is based on the ‘New Interpretation’ and links money value added to surplus value production at the industry level. Data on value added by industry for the U.S. are used to estimate surplus value production by industry. The analysis allows comparison of surplus value production and realization in each industry. The pattern of differentials between surplus value creation and realization across industries sheds light on the processes of capitalist competition and points to a source of instability for capitalist economies.     

‘Anecdotal myths’: Tinbergen's influence on Harrod's growth theory

Abstract

In the history of economic theory, Harrod's transition from the explanation of business cycles in An Essay on the Trade Cycle (1936) to his well‐known growth theory in ‘An essay in dynamic theory’ (1939) has always been surrounded by some degree of speculation. One of the topics in that area of speculation concerns the (degree of) influence exerted by Tinbergen on the development of Harrod's growth theory during the 1936–9 period.

This paper argues that Tinbergen's influence on Harrod's work mainly took place on formal, mathematical, grounds, leaving methodological matters untouched. This matter is of some importance in understanding the success of what was initially considered by others as a ‘dynamic’ extension of the Keynesian research programme and later evolved, through the work of Tinbergen and Solow, into a neoclassical growth theory.     

Comments on “The Corporate State,Economic Performance,and Social Policy”

This paper provides an introduction to the Minsky-Veblen Cycles as a specific example of pluralist economic thinking in the context of the recent global economic crisis. It illustrates how pluralism can be applied to economic research. Specifically, the Minsky-Veblen Cycles combine three elements of institutional and post-Keynesian thought to explain key features of the current crisis. These elements are (1) John Maynard Keynes's postulate of effective demand, (2) Hyman Minsky's financial instability hypothesis, and (3) Thorstein Veblen's concept of conspicuous consumption. In this paper, we have a two-fold approach to them: First, we systematize the connection between the Minsky-Veblen Cycles as a theoretical argument and the epistemological rationale of a pluralist approach to economics. Second, we contrast the implications of our approach for incorporating behavioral assumptions in macroeconomic arguments to mainstream claims for a "microfoundation" of macroeconomic theory.     

The Complementary Relationship Between Institutional and Complexity Economics: The Example of Deep Mechanismic Explanations

Analyzing economic systems from an evolutionary-institutional or a complexity perspective are two complementary approaches to economic inquiry. I discuss three arguments in favor of this hypothesis: (i) eminent institutional economists have examined the economy as what today could be considered a complex system; (ii) complexity economists lack meta-theoretical foundations which could be provided by institutionalist theory; and (iii) institutional economists could benefit from using methods of complexity economics. In this context, I argue that scholars considering the economy to be complex should seek to explain it by discovering social mechanisms instead of focusing on prediction. In order to distinguish between alternative explanations, scholars should refer to the deepness of an explanation, rather than to Occam’s razor.     

生态安全与治理：基于复杂系统理论 嵌入经济学视角的分析

本文从复杂系统理论整体与适应的研究视角出发,在方法论、核心假设、发展目标三个方面指出了以新古典经济学理论为代表的传统经济社会发展理论存在的生态缺憾。在此基础上,借鉴和汲取现代经济学、新制度经济学的有用成分,探讨了生态安全长期得不到关注的多重致因,搭建起一个生态安全与动态治理的理论框架。笔者指出,以往的生态治理制度之所以未能发挥效能,主要是单维和静态的治理制度是有适用界域和有限效率的,因此,多维度、动态的、相对完整的生态治理制度框架,为提升生态治理制度持续的治理效率提供了一个可供选择的思路。     

Sociology of economics or sociology of economy? theoretical-methodological arguments for sociological economics

This paper makes a proposal for reintroducing sociological or social economics into contemporary economic science. Such a reintroduction is proposed to be substantive, by analyzing the social structuring of the economy, and formal, by including sociological/social economics in the current (JEL) classification system of economic disciplines (code A.15). Both epistemological and ontological arguments can be presented to support the proposal. Epistemological arguments invoke the presence of essential components of sociological economics in the development of economic thought, and ontological arguments stress the role of social factors in economic life. In this paper I present primarily epistemological (theoretical-methodological) arguments for sociological economics, and secondarily ontological ones. I show that the present designation, sociology of economics, is something different from sociological or social economics in that the former refers to economic epistemology (knowledge) and the latter to economic ontology (reality). I conclude that, in addition to a sociology of economic science, we need a sociology of economic life. There is nothing surprising in the habit of economists to invade the sociological field. A major part of their work—practically the whole of what they have to say on institutions and on the…[social] forces which shape economic behavior—inevitably overlaps the sociologist’s preserves. In consequence, a no man’s land or everyman’s land has developed that might conveniently be called economic sociology … [or sociological economics] (Schumpeter 1956:134). The author is grateful to two anonymous referees for their constructive comments on an earlier version of this article.     

Determinants of banks’ Nerlovian economic efficiency: a DEA-bootstrap approach

ABSTRACT

This study aims to evaluate the Nerlovian economic efficiency of Taiwanese commercial banks and its determinants by assuming the presence of an imperfectly competitive market using a two-stage estimation procedure: Nerlovian economic inefficiency and its components’ price, technical and allocative efficiencies computed and decomposed in the first stage, which are regressed on the explanatory variables with a bootstrapped truncated approach in the second stage. The estimation results show that in the first-stage analysis, the Nerlovian economic inefficiency of banks is primarily due to allocative inefficiency, and indicate the existence of price inefficiency in Taiwan. In the second-stage analysis, the results confirm that both the years in operation of the bank and the ratio of credit loans are the main determinants of banking profit efficiency. In addition, this study not only shows that publicly owned banks contribute to better price efficiency but also proves that loan loss reserve to total assets is negatively associated with technical efficiency. The equity ratio exerts an insignificant favourable impact on allocative efficiency. The findings of this research are essential for bank managers in Taiwan.     

The New Economics of Labor Migration: Beware of Neoclassicals Bearing Gifts

Abstract

Until the emergence of the New Economics of Labor Migration (NELM) in the 1980s, migration scholars were largely divided into two main theoretical camps, viz. the neoclassical and historical-structural approaches to migration. Against this background, the NELM presented itself as a theoretical ‘third way’ between the two latter approaches, and purported to reconcile agency and structure in a way previously unachieved by either of them. While those pretensions gained a fair amount of acceptance and popularity, this paper argues that they are fundamentally misleading, and that the NELM is little more than a slightly more sophisticated avatar of the neoclassical approach to migration, whose fundamental weaknesses it has not, and cannot, shed. This paper further argues that, in so doing, the NELM effectively constitutes migration theory's own instance of economics imperialism, i.e. the attempt to advance the fundamental tenets of neoclassical economics (methodological individualism and the assumption of optimizing rationality) within the context of the study and interpretation of various social phenomena. In order to put forth these arguments, this paper provides a summary presentation of the standard neoclassical theory of migration, the historical-structural heterodoxy and the NELM; highlights why it is that the NELM should be regarded as a ‘reworked’ version of the neoclassical theoretical framework and discusses its inception in the context of the ‘information-theoretic revolution’ in economics; and argues for a new and improved ‘historical-structural synthesis’ as a more satisfactory alternative to both the NELM and the standard neoclassical theory.     

Is ‘new’ behavioral economics ‘mainstream’?

When comparing ‘new’ and ‘old’ behavioral economics (BE), many argue that ‘new’ BE has close ties with what is often called ‘mainstream’ economics. The aim of this paper is to reframe the ‘old’ vs. ‘new’ BE debate and investigate the nature of the relationship between psychologists, behavioral economists, and ‘mainstream’ economists. This will lead us to develop the concept of ‘space of interaction’, building on Galison’s metaphor of ‘trading zones’, to emphasize the role of outsiders, strategic thinking, and negotiation in ‘new’ BE. By discussing some often implicit arguments in an otherwise disconnected literature, we seek to bring new arguments to the discussions through a careful study of those relationships in the history of ‘new’ BE and its more recent developments. Leaving aside the orthodox/heterodox contrast and comparative approaches, we hope to provide a different account of the changes in ‘new’ BE and its relationship with the ‘mainstream’.     

Neoliberalism,Polanyi’s Protective Response,and Veblenian Waste

As capitalism unfolds, continual technological advance — in combination with the relentless accumulation imperative — serves to amplify material progress. The expanding economic sphere begins to pervade the everyday lives and thinking of the individual. The institutionalization of the market fundamentally changes the structure of society and, in so doing, fundamentally changes the institutional structure through which individuals are socialized. The social dislocation generated therein prompts Karl Polanyi’s protective response. Despite this market intensification, the existence of the economic surplus undermines the syllogistics of market-determined pricing. Evidence of the economic surplus and Veblenian waste as well as of the fact that the competitive law of value is not operable under neoliberalism is found in the lobby industry and campaign contributions. This research seeks to explicitly connect the concepts of Polanyi’s protective response with Veblenian waste and the economic surplus in order to better understand how the irrational system of neoliberalism continues to evolve.     

Marx,Finance and Political Economy

ABSTRACT

Shortly after the publication of Volume I of Capital, the financial requirements of capitalist enterprise forced the financial innovation of bond and stock finance for joint stock companies. Marx intended to re-write Capital in order to incorporate this change. He did not achieve this. The economic analysis of capitalism with long-term finance was undertaken by Hilferding in his Finance Capital. Thereafter, a strand of economic analysis of production and distribution emerged in the work of the Austro-Marxists, Veblen, Keynes, Kalecki, Steindl and Sweezy, and the Italian Kaleckians, Joseph Halevi and Riccardo Bellofiore, which incorporated the change made to the structure and dynamics of capitalism by long-term finance. However, this shift in capitalist financing has largely been ignored in economic theory, while much of the heterodox analysis that seeks to challenge the role of finance in contemporary capitalism has not integrated finance consistently. The change from the classic capitalism to finance capital raises important questions about the meaning and relevance of Marx’s work today.     

外包造成了经济波动吗?-来自中国省级面板的实证研究

本文运用非径向DEA方法-RAM模型估算了1998--2010年中国29个省份的经济效率、碳环境效率,并将两者整合在统一的联合效率框架以测度碳排放与经济增长的耦合程度,结果发现我国节能减碳政策取得了明显效率改进的"水平效应".松弛量分解表明高能耗与投资过度是非效率的主要源泉.进一步,我们通过约束模型单向投影发现中国节能减碳的途径依赖于"自然减排",而能源替代与技术进步效应明显不足.     

APPLICATION OF PANEL DATA MODELS IN BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS OF THE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION SECTOR*

ABSTRACT ** : This paper explores the application of several panel data models in measuring productive efficiency of the electricity distribution sector. Stochastic Frontier Analysis has been used to estimate the cost‐efficiency of 59 distribution utilities operating over a nine‐year period in Switzerland. The estimated coefficients and inefficiency scores are compared across three different panel data models. The results indicate that individual efficiency estimates are sensitive to the econometric specification of unobserved firm‐specific heterogeneity. This paper shows that alternative panel models such as the ‘true’ random effects model proposed by Greene (2005) could be used to explore the possible impacts of unobserved firm‐specific factors on efficiency estimates. When these factors are specified as a separate stochastic term, the efficiency estimates are substantially higher suggesting that conventional models could confound efficiency differences with other unobserved variations among companies. On the other hand, refined specification of unobserved heterogeneity might lead to an underestimation of inefficiencies by mistaking potential persistent inefficiencies as external factors. Given that specification of inefficiency and heterogeneity relies on non‐testable assumptions, there is no conclusive evidence in favour of one or the other specification. However, this paper argues that alternative panel data models along with conventional estimators can be used to obtain approximate lower and upper bounds for companies' efficiency scores.     

资源约束下中国碳减排与经济增长的双赢绩效研究-基于非径向DEA方法RAM模型的测度

本文运用非径向DEA方法——RAM模型估算了1998—2010年中国29个省份的经济效率、碳环境效率,并将两者整合在统一的联合效率框架以测度碳排放与经济增长的耦合程度,结果发现我国节能减碳政策取得了明显效率改进的"水平效应"。松弛量分解表明高能耗与投资过度是非效率的主要源泉。进一步,我们通过约束模型单向投影发现中国节能减碳的途径依赖于"自然减排",而能源替代与技术进步效应明显不足。