Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution
Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution
复制标题
对新古典增长与分配理论的批判
作者：
L. Pasinetti
本文考察了收入分配的主要理论与经济增长理论的关系。首先，考虑经典方法，重点关注李嘉图理论。然后讨论新古典理论，强调其起源（庞巴维克、威克塞尔、克拉克）和总生产函数的作用。人们回顾了哈罗德增长模型之后出现的收入分配“凯恩斯主义”理论，以及新古典主义理论（在索洛和米德的贡献之后）令人惊讶的复兴。但是，正如本文所表明的那样，新古典收入分配理论缺乏逻辑一致性，基础不稳固，正如对新古典生产函数的严厉批评所揭示的那样。主流经济文献通过简单地忽略这个问题来规避这个问题，而内生增长模型则将分配理论问题排除在考虑之外。然而，虽然主流经济学绕过了收入分配问题，但这是一个非常重要的问题，不容忽视，许多新的研究方向经过简要调查，尝试了新的方法来解决这个问题。
The paper surveys the main theories of income distribution in their relationship with the theories of economic growth. First, the Classical approach is considered, focusing on the Ricardian theory. Then the neoclassical theory is discussed, highlighting its origins (Bohm-Bawerk, Wicksell, Clark) and the role of the aggregate production function. The emergence of a "Keynesian" theory of income distributionin the wake of Harrod's model of growth is then recalled together with the surprising resurgence of the neoclassical theory (following the contributions of Solow and Meade). But, as the paper shows, the neoclassical theory of income distributionlacks logical consistency and has shaky foundations, as has been revealed by the severecritiques moved to the neoclassical production function. Mainstream economic literature circumvents this problem by simply ignoring it, while the models of endogenous growth exclude the issue of distribution theory from their consideration. However, while mainstream economics bypasses the problems of incomedistribution, this is too relevant an issue to be ignored and a number of new research lines, briefly surveyed, try new approaches to it.