Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Why does the history of economic thought neglect Post-Keynesian economics?

Danielle Guizzo

Keywords: Post-Keynesian economics; history of economic thought; history of recent economics; post-war macroeconomics; traditional heterodoxy; new heterodoxy

Despite receiving increased interest after the global financial crisis of 2007–2008 and consolidating itself as an established research program, Post-Keynesian economics remains under-represented within publications on the history of economics. When compared to other traditional heterodox approaches such as Marxist, Institutionalist, and Austrian economics, Post-Keynesian economics falls behind considerably, contradicting the Post-Keynesian appreciation for the history of the discipline. This article explores some reasons behind this detachment by considering two main factors: first, the recent disciplinary and institutional changes experienced by the history of economics in the last ten years; and, second, the recent ‘maturing state’ of Post-Keynesian economics and its unique treatment of the history of economic thought. The article concludes by suggesting a new research agenda for Post-Keynesianism, making use of the ‘applied’ turn proposed by the recent history of economic thought as one of the strategies for Post-Keynesians to engage with the economics discipline.

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

or login to access all content.