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

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]


Tagged with: ,
Posted in Research
Dr. Tae-Hee Jo

Associate Professor
Economics and Finance Department
SUNY Buffalo State
1300 Elmwood Ave.
Buffalo, NY 14222

o: Classroom Building B333
t: 716-878-3374
e: taeheejo [at] gmail.com
e: joth [at] buffalostate.edu


The Routledge Handbook of Heterodox Economics (2017)

Essays in Honor of Frederic S. Lee

Advancing the Frontiers of Heterodox Economics: Essays in Honor of Frederic S. Lee (2015)

Marx, Veblen, and Foundations of Heterodox Economics

Marx, Veblen, and the Foundations of Heterodox Economics: Essays in Honor of John F. Henry (2015)

Heterodox Analysis of Financial Crisis and Reform (2011)

Heterodox Analysis of Financial Crisis and Reform (2011)