Skip Navigation


Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on December 9, 2005
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2006 30(4):483-505; doi:10.1093/cje/bei093
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/4/483    most recent
bei093v1
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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lawson, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow A12 - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
Right arrow B00 - General
Right arrow B40 - General
Right arrow B50 - General
Right arrow B59 - Other
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

Article

The nature of heterodox economics

Tony Lawson*

* Faculty of Economics and Politics, Cambridge

Address for correspondence: Faculty of Economics and Politics, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DD, UK; email: Tony.Lawson{at}econ.cam.ac.uk

Abstract

Heterodoxy serves as an umbrella term to cover the coming together of separate projects or traditions. In answering the question, ‘what distinguishes heterodoxy from the orthodoxy?’, the author argues that matters of ontology are central. In answering the question, ‘how are the various traditions that make up the modern heterodoxy to be distinguished from each other?’, the author defends criteria other than varying commitments to specific substantive theories, policy measures or techniques (or basic units) of analysis.

Key Words: Heterodox economics • Orthodox economics • Ontology

JEL classifications: A12, B00, B40, B50, B59

Manuscript received November 7, 2003; final version received August 5, 2005.


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
I. van Staveren
Post-Keynesianism meets feminist economics
Camb. J. Econ., August 22, 2008; (2008) ben033v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
V. Bigo
Explaining modern economics (as a microcosm of society)
Camb. J. Econ., July 1, 2008; 32(4): 527 - 554.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
J. B. Davis
The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy
Camb. J. Econ., May 1, 2008; 32(3): 349 - 366.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
M. Peacock
Transforming economics into what? Heterodox economics and critical realism
Camb. J. Econ., March 1, 2008; 32(2): 219 - 233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
M. da Graca Moura and N. Martins
On some criticisms of critical realism in economics
Camb. J. Econ., March 1, 2008; 32(2): 203 - 218.
[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.