Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Mathematics in economics: the monopoly point of view?

Mathematics in economics: the monopoly point of view? Describes how mathematics enjoyed a virtual monopoly as the privileged method of economic inquiry in the post-war period. Counters the argument that such a position generates negative consequences, such as monopoly rents and the abuse of dominant positions. Argues that competing schools of economic thought such as Chicago, Harvard, neoclassical and post-Keynesian, neo-Australian, evolutionary and institutional economists all hold positions that diverge on essentials. Suggests that the market structure of post-war economies is not a monopoly but a heterogeneous asymmetric oligopoly with a few large and a fringe of small suppliers. Analyses the relationship between two large and two fringe suppliers, stating that the oligopoly metaphor suggests that there is competition between schools that may lead to winners and losers and to changes in the market shares. In conclusion, offers a projection of what the author expects, i.e. who will lose and how the market structure will change, offering an insight into the role of mathematics. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Economic Studies Emerald Publishing

Mathematics in economics: the monopoly point of view?

Journal of Economic Studies , Volume 27 (4/5): 6 – Aug 1, 2000

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/mathematics-in-economics-the-monopoly-point-of-view-ODcu0IyQHQ
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 MCB UP Ltd. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0144-3585
DOI
10.1108/01443580010341844
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Describes how mathematics enjoyed a virtual monopoly as the privileged method of economic inquiry in the post-war period. Counters the argument that such a position generates negative consequences, such as monopoly rents and the abuse of dominant positions. Argues that competing schools of economic thought such as Chicago, Harvard, neoclassical and post-Keynesian, neo-Australian, evolutionary and institutional economists all hold positions that diverge on essentials. Suggests that the market structure of post-war economies is not a monopoly but a heterogeneous asymmetric oligopoly with a few large and a fringe of small suppliers. Analyses the relationship between two large and two fringe suppliers, stating that the oligopoly metaphor suggests that there is competition between schools that may lead to winners and losers and to changes in the market shares. In conclusion, offers a projection of what the author expects, i.e. who will lose and how the market structure will change, offering an insight into the role of mathematics.

Journal

Journal of Economic StudiesEmerald Publishing

Published: Aug 1, 2000

Keywords: Mathematics; Economics

References