Table of Contents

Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Growth

Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Growth

Elgar original reference

Edited by Mark Setterfield

Comprising specially commissioned essays, the Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of alternative theories of economic growth. It surveys major sub-fields (including classical, Kaleckian, evolutionary, and Kaldorian growth theories) and highlights cutting-edge issues such as the relationship between finance and growth, the interplay of trend and cycle, and the role of aggregate demand in the long run.

Chapter 15: Feasible Egalitarianism: Demand-led Growth, Labour and Technology

C.W.M. Naastepad and Servaas Storm

Subjects: economics and finance, evolutionary economics, history of economic thought, post-keynesian economics


C.W.M. Naastepad and Servaas Storm 1 Introduction When it comes to analysing unemployment and, more generally, macroeconomic performance in the OECD, the standard – mainstream – analysis is predicated upon a “one-size-fits-all” approach – usually some variant of the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU) model – and does not recognize, let alone incorporate, systemic differences between OECD economies. In this approach, high unemployment (and lacklustre macro performance in general) is a result of labour market rigidities, caused by “excessive” regulation. It follows that, to reduce unemployment and revive growth, labour markets have to be deregulated and welfare states have to be scaled down. There thus exists an in-built conflict (or trade-off) between economic growth and low unemployment, on the one hand, and egalitarian outcomes (based on high wage growth and relatively pro-worker labour market regulation), on the other hand. Egalitarianism, in other words, comes at the cost of slow growth, high unemployment and limited technological dynamism. However, although the NAIRU view that labour market regulation explains OECD unemployment has become widely accepted, particularly in policy circles, it is by no means universally accepted. Serious problems remain. Specifically, empirical evidence suggesting an association between unemployment and regulatory institutions in OECD labour markets has been shown to be statistically non-robust (Baker et al., 2005a, 2005b; Baccaro and Rei, 2005; Howell et al., 2006). We argue that this non-robustness (or weakness) of the association between unemployment and regulation must be accepted as a stylized fact in itself, because it reflects the fact that policies of real...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information