Pascal Bridel – författare

2010 marks the hundredth anniversary of the death of Léon Walras, the brilliant originator and first formaliser of general equilibrium theory – one of the pillars of modern economic theory. In advancing much derided practical solutions Walras also displayed more concern for the problems of living in a second best world than is common in modern pure theories of the invisible hand, efficient market hypothesis, DSGE macroeconomics or the thinking of some contemporary free market admirers all based on general equilibrium theory.

This book brings contributions from the likes of Kenneth Arrow, Alan Kirman, Richard Posner, Amartya Sen and Robert Solow to share their thoughts and reflections on the theoretical heritage of Léon Walras. Some authors reminisce on the part they played in the development of modern general economics theory; others reflect on the crucial part played by general equilibrium in the development of macroeconomics, microeconomics, growth theory, welfare economics and the theory of justice; others still complain about the wrong path economic theory took under the influence of post 1945 developments in general equilibrium theory.

2010 marks the hundredth anniversary of the death of Léon Walras, the brilliant originator and first formaliser of general equilibrium theory – one of the pillars of modern economic theory. In advancing much derided practical solutions Walras also displayed more concern for the problems of living in a second best world than is common in modern pure theories of the invisible hand, efficient market hypothesis, DSGE macroeconomics or the thinking of some contemporary free market admirers all based on general equilibrium theory.

This book brings contributions from the likes of Kenneth Arrow, Alan Kirman, Richard Posner, Amartya Sen and Robert Solow to share their thoughts and reflections on the theoretical heritage of Léon Walras. Some authors reminisce on the part they played in the development of modern general economics theory; others reflect on the crucial part played by general equilibrium in the development of macroeconomics, microeconomics, growth theory, welfare economics and the theory of justice; others still complain about the wrong path economic theory took under the influence of post 1945 developments in general equilibrium theory.

This book aims to start a debate on the relationship between economic theory – and more precisely business cycle theory – and economic policy, emphasising the diversity of views on economic policy which characterised older periods, in contrast to the homogeneity of the analysis and diagnosis provided by current business cycles developments.

Since the 1970s, economic theorists excluding any economic policy interventions and favouring strictly supply-side economic policies have gained a growing influence. The development of Equilibrium Business Cycles theories coincides with the collapse, at least in academic circles, of the Keynesian consensus favouring stabilization policies. The alternative approach which emerged was based on an a priori hypothesis about the stability of the economy – or at least on its remarkable ability to stabilize itself. The direct consequence of this approach is that any stabilization objective for economic policy is not only misguided but also inefficient. There are many reasons why Keynesian policies ceased to be dominant in theoretical circles, but the most helpful circumstances for the rapid propagation of a new revolutionary theory is certainly the existence of an established orthodoxy, clearly inconsistent with the most salient facts of reality.

This book offers a sample of different theoretical approaches to business cycles, examining their respective views on economic policy with the objective of understanding business cycles that have been lost, and identifying those views which explain fluctuations and the way we conceive economic policy. This book was originally published as a special issue of The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought.

This book aims to start a debate on the relationship between economic theory – and more precisely business cycle theory – and economic policy, emphasising the diversity of views on economic policy which characterised older periods, in contrast to the homogeneity of the analysis and diagnosis provided by current business cycles developments.

Since the 1970s, economic theorists excluding any economic policy interventions and favouring strictly supply-side economic policies have gained a growing influence. The development of Equilibrium Business Cycles theories coincides with the collapse, at least in academic circles, of the Keynesian consensus favouring stabilization policies. The alternative approach which emerged was based on an a priori hypothesis about the stability of the economy – or at least on its remarkable ability to stabilize itself. The direct consequence of this approach is that any stabilization objective for economic policy is not only misguided but also inefficient. There are many reasons why Keynesian policies ceased to be dominant in theoretical circles, but the most helpful circumstances for the rapid propagation of a new revolutionary theory is certainly the existence of an established orthodoxy, clearly inconsistent with the most salient facts of reality.

This book offers a sample of different theoretical approaches to business cycles, examining their respective views on economic policy with the objective of understanding business cycles that have been lost, and identifying those views which explain fluctuations and the way we conceive economic policy. This book was originally published as a special issue of The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought.