Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277390 
Year of Publication: 
2017
Citation: 
[Journal:] European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) [ISSN:] 2052-7772 [Volume:] 14 [Issue:] 2 [Year:] 2017 [Pages:] 238-249
Publisher: 
Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Abstract: 
The paper discusses the merits and risks of heterodox economists using mainstream economic models, and especially dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models, to promote economic policy conclusions usually found in post-Keynesian economic thought such as large fiscal multipliers, importance of distributional issues for macroeconomic stability, and the role of endogenous money creation for the explanation of economic downturns after a banking crisis. It argues that using these models can help heterodox researchers to communicate with mainstream economists and might help to further one's personal academic career, but that such a strategy comes along with the risk of having to accept other, very questionable policy conclusions and of stabilizing the use of the DSGE models in mainstream economics, hence potentially delaying a Kuhnean-type 'scientific revolution' in macroeconomics
Subjects: 
heterodox
mainstream
DSGE
austerity
JEL: 
A11
B50
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.