Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zambelli, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow A10 - General
Right arrow D24 - Production; Capital and Total Factor [...]
Right arrow E11 - Marxian; Sraffian; Institutional; Evolutionary
Right arrow E13 - Neoclassical
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Cambridge Journal of Economics 28:99-120 (2004)
Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 28, No. 1, © Cambridge Political Economy Society 2004; all rights reserved

The 40% neoclassical aggregate theory of production

Stefano Zambelli*

Address for correspondence: Department of Economics, Politics and Public Administration, Aalborg University, Fibigerstræde 1, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark; email: stefano{at}socsci.auc.dk

JEL classifications: E13, E11, A10, D24

The assumption that production in an economic system may be described by an aggregate neoclassical production function is at the heart of most modern equilibrium neoclassical business cycles and growth models. Its validity requires stringent assumptions on individual production functions and market structure. In this paper, the likelihood that an aggregate neoclassical production function could emerge from a simple heterogeneous production system is assessed by the use of computer simulations. The conclusion is that there exists a world of significant size for which the aggregate neoclassical theory of production does not hold.

Key Words: Neoclassical production functions • Growth theory • Capital controversy • Wage–profit frontier • Computational economics

Manuscript received October 2, 2000; final version received April 22, 2002.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
Z. Han and B. Schefold
An empirical investigation of paradoxes: reswitching and reverse capital deepening in capital theory
Camb. J. Econ., September 1, 2006; 30(5): 737 - 765.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.