The Role of Micro in Heterodox Economics: A View of a Heterodox Micro Theorist

Posted on

Frederic S. Lee. “The Role of Micro in Heterodox Economics: A View of a Heterodox Micro Theorist,” Presented at the Association for Heterodox Economics Annual Conference, University of Greenwich, London, UK. July 3, 2014. [click on link to download presentation slides]

A Call for Contributions: Frederic S. Lee Heterodox Economics Scholarship Fund

Posted on Updated on

Dear Friends, Colleagues, and Heterodox Economists,

Fred Lee has been a driving force of heterodox economics movements over the past 30 years. He played a major role in establishing the Association for Heterodox Economics, founded and edited the Heterodox Economics Newsletter, edited the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, has been actively involved in heterodox associations such as AFEE, AFIT, AHE, ASE, EAEPE, HES, ICAPE, URPE, and so on. His activities and contributions are truly community-oriented and self-sacrificing. Above all, Fred has always been concerned about students since they will be the future of heterodox economics.

As some of you already know, Fred will soon retire due to an unexpected illness. In the face of uncertain life conditions, Fred and his wife, Ruth, have recently established the Heterodox Economics Scholarship Fund, which is designed to financially support doctoral heterodox economics students. The Scholarship is open to all doctoral students studying in a heterodox economics program, although currently preference is given to UMKC doctoral students due to the limited amount of funds.

We are sending out this call for contributions with the hope that you share Fred’s “good-will” and make a contribution to this Fund so that more heterodox economics students can complete their studies successfully. Moreover, if you believe you are indebted to Fred for his many contributions, contribute to the Frederic S. Lee Heterodox Economics Scholarship Fund and support students.

To learn more about the Fund, visit here:

To make a contribution, visit here:

Should you have any questions, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,


John F. Henry
University of Missouri-Kansas City


Tae-Hee Jo
SUNY Buffalo State


D. L. Clark (1974), Studies in the Origins and Development of Growth Theory, 1925 – 1950

Posted on Updated on

Studies in the Origins and Development of Growth Theory, 1925 – 1950


D. L. Clark

Ph.D Dissertation
University of Sydney
March 1974

An extremely important dissertation that starts with Quesnay and Marx, deals with Leontief, Dmitriev, and Bortkiewicz, goes on to Austrian capital theory, Fritz Burchardt, and the Kiel School, and ends with Hobson, Ayres, and Adolph Lowe. This dissertation was extremely novel at the time it was written and remains so today since most heterodox economists have no idea who Burchardt, Lowe, and the Kiel School were. (Frederic S. Lee)

[Unfortunately the microfilm copy of the dissertation is not very good, so it will take some straining to read the dissertation.]

Table of Contents

Chapter I: Introduction

(a) On Historical Studies in Development
(b) On Growth Theory
(c) Aims and Scope of the Thesis

Chapter II: Prologue

(a) The Tableau Economique of Francois Quesnay
(b) Dynamic Aspects of the Tableau Economique
(c) The Reproduction Models of Karl Marx
(d) The Tableau Economique and the Reproduction Models

Chapter III: The Origins of Input-Output Analysis

(a) The Tableau Economique and Leontief’s Tableau
(b) Marx and Leontief
(c) Leontief and the Soviet Experiments with Input-Output Tables in the 1902s
(d) From Physiocracy to Walrasian General Equilibrium Theory: The Influence of A. N. Isnard
(e) Leontief and the Kiel School

Chapter IV: The Transformation Problem and the Theory of Capital and Growth [Part 1, pp. 114-136] [Part 2, pp. 137-167]

(a) Some Limitations of Input-Output Analysis
(b) An Outline of the Transformation Problem
(c) Solutions to the Transformation Problem: the Contributions of V. K. Dmitriev and L. von Bortkiewicz
(d) An Essential Digression: the ‘Classical’ Growth Model of J. von Neumann
(e) The Impact and Continuing Significance of the Transformation Problem

Chapter V: The Capital Controversies of the 1930s and the Contribution of the Kiel School

(a) The Austrian Theory of Capital: Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk’s Theory of Capital
(b) Knut Wicksell’s Revision of Böhm-Bawerk’s Theory of Capital
(c) The 1930s Controversies: F. A. Burchardt’s Critique of Austrian Capital Theory
(d) The Demise of the Kiel Tradition

Chapter VI: The Institutionalist Critique of Orthodox Dynamics

(a) Thorstein Veblen
(b) J. A. Hobson
(c) C. E. Ayres and B. S. Keirstead
(d) S. Merlin
(e) Adolph Lowe

Chapter VII: Precursors of Harrod-Domar Growth Models

(a) Soviet Dynamics of the 1920s: The Feldman Model
(b) A Polish Marxist: Michal Kalecki
(c) Japanese Experiments with the Reproduction Models
(d) A Related Swedish Model: G. Cassel’s Model of a Regularly Expanding Economy

Chapter VIII: Conclusion [and pp. 264-270]


An international student call for pluralism in economics

Posted on Updated on

“It is not only the world economy that is in crisis. The teaching of economics is in crisis too, and this crisis has consequences far beyond the university walls. What is taught shapes the minds of the next generation of policymakers, and therefore shapes the societies we live in. We, 42 associations of economics students from 19 different countries, believe it is time to reconsider the way economics is taught. We are dissatisfied with the dramatic narrowing of the curriculum that has taken place over the last couple of decades. This lack of intellectual diversity does not only restrain education and research. It limits our ability to contend with the multidimensional challenges of the 21st century – from financial stability, to food security and climate change. The real world should be brought back into the classroom, as well as debate and a pluralism of theories and methods. This will help renew the discipline and ultimately create a space in which solutions to society’s problems can be generated….”

[Red the full Letter here and support the Initiative]

Ronald Meek Papers

Posted on Updated on

“The following papers were obtained from Mrs. Meek circa 1998. The originals remain with Mrs. Meek. Ronald Meek was a professor at the University of Leicester when he died; and it appears that all of his papers were destroyed at this time. At least I could not find any. In any case, I was teaching at De Montfort University at this time and was beginning to work on the history of heterodox economics, which was eventually published in 2009. Because Meek was part of this history I contacted Mrs. Meek to see if she had any papers. She did, but not very much, and mostly from the 1970s. I hope you find what I obtained from Mrs. Meek of interest.” Frederic S. Lee

Advancing the Frontiers of Heterodox Economics (2015)

Posted on Updated on

Advancing the Frontiers of Heterodox Economics:

Essays in Honor of Frederic S. Lee

Edited by
Tae-Hee Jo (SUNY Buffalo State, USA)
Zdravka Todorova (Wright State University, USA)

Published by
Routledge (Advances in Heterodox Economics Book Series) in 2015


The objective of this edited volume is twofold. Firstly, we claim that heterodox economics has been established as the alternative to the mainstream-neoclassical paradigm. This claim is validated by “frontiers” of heterodox economics included in the volume, which transcend the critiques of mainstream economics and, more importantly, which demonstrate new developments in the various traditions in heterodox economics, such as Post Keynesian-Sraffian, Institutionalist-Evolutionary, Feminist, Marxian-Radical Political economics. Those strands are integrated one way or another by various authors in the volume. Indicative of such cross-communication among various heterodox approaches is the fact that they are not only compatible but also capable of offering a better and enlightening narrative qua theory once they are carefully consolidated. Although some heterodox economists are skeptical and/or reluctant about this theoretical movement, authors will address that heterodox economics has been and will be developing in a pluralistic and integrative manner in the presence of the giant elephant in economics.

The transformation in the contested landscape of economics is made possible by a number of selfless heterodox economists as well as the communities and social networks of heterodox economists. At the center of the transformation movement for the past three decades is Professor Frederic S. Lee who has made numerous contributions to the making of heterodox economics communities, to heterodox microeconomic theory, and to the analysis of the social provisioning process. At the occasion of his retirement after over 30 years of professional career as a devoted heterodox economist, we would like to honor Professor Lee for his invaluable and never-ending efforts to advance heterodox economics from which current and future generations of heterodox economists would benefit. This is the second objective of the volume.

With the overarching theme and specific areas closely related with Frederic Lee’s contributions, we have invited young (at heart) and emerging heterodox economists who have been expanding the horizon of heterodox economics. Total eighteen chapters are divided into three parts: Part I Making History of Heterodox Economics by Making Identity and Institutions, Part II Heterodox Microeconomics and the Foundation of Heterodox Macroeconomics, and Part III Advancing the Heterodox Analysis of Social Provisioning. Authors are located in 12 different countries and represent most strands in heterodox economics. They will speak to readers in a forward looking tone focusing on current developments and future directions. These diverse themes, theoretical issues, and approaches are best described by following keywords: Heterodox economics, heterodox microeconomic theory and methodology, heterodox microfoundation, social provisioning, agency, surplus approach, pluralism, community and social network of heterodox economist. Apparently, these keywords capture the unique and important characteristics of this book.

Table of Contents

  • Foreword: Sheila C. Dow (University of Stirling, UK) and John F. Henry (University of Missouri-Kansas City, USA)
  • Introduction: Frederic S. Lee’s Contributions to Heterodox Economics by Tae-Hee Jo and Zdravka Todorova

Part I. Making History of Heterodox Economics by Making Identity and Institutions

  1. Carlo D’lppoliti and Alessandro Roncaglia (Sapienza University of Rome, Italy): On the Importance of History of Economics for Heterodox Economists
  2. Ioana Negru (Anglia Ruskin University, UK): Reflections on Fred Lee’s Heterodox Methodology
  3. Bruce Philp (Nottingham Trent University, UK) and Andrew Mearman (University of the West of England, UK): The Association for Heterodox Economics: Past, Present and Future
  4. Therese Jefferson (Curtin University, Australia): Integrating Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Economic Research Projects: Insights from Three Australian Studies

Part II. Heterodox Microeconomics and the Foundations of Heterodox Macroeconomics

  1. Tae-Hee Jo (SUNY Buffalo State, USA): Heterodox Microeconomics and Heterodox Microfoundations
  2. Jakob Kapeller (University of Linz, Austria): Heterodox Microfoundations from an Epistemological Perspective
  3. Gyun Cheol Gu (Korean Institute of Local Finance, Korea): Extended Post Keynesian Pricing Taxonomy
  4. Ruslan Dzarasov (Moscow State University, Russia): The Eichner-Lee Tradition in Post Keynesian Investment theory
  5. Jordan Melmies (University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis, France): Industrial Economics and Post Keynesian Theory: The Effect of Competition upon Profit Margins from a Post Keynesian Perspective
  6. Erik Dean (Portland Community College, USA): Market Governance and the Boundaries of the Firm: The Case of the US Software Industry
  7. Lynne Chester (University of Sydney, Australia): Analysing Real-World Markets

Part III. Advancing the Heterodox Analysis of Social Provisioning

  1. Nuno Martins (University of the Azores, Portugal): Advancing Heterodox Economics in the Tradition of the Surplus Approach
  2. Zdravka Todorova (Wright State University, USA): Consumption, Social Provisioning, and Capitalism: Beyond Consumer Choice and Aggregates
  3. Tuna Baskoy (Ryerson University, Canada): Social Provisioning Process, Market Instability, and Managed Competition
  4. Henning Shwardt (University of Bremen, Germany): Development Effects and the Social Provisioning Process
  5. Bruno Tinel (Université Paris 1, France): The Embedded State and Social Provisioning: The Contribution of Norbert Elias to the Understanding of Modern State Emergence
  6. Huáscar Pessali (Federal University of Paraná, Brazil), Fabiano Dalto (Federal University of Paraná, Brazil), and Ramón García Fernández (Federal University of ABC, Brazil): Metaphors We Die By: The Case of State as Family
  7. Bruce Philp (Nottingham Trent University, UK) and Andrew Trigg (The Open University, UK): Heterodox Economics, Distribution and the Class Struggle