Skip Navigation


Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on April 2, 2008
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2008 32(5):821-826; doi:10.1093/cje/ben010
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
32/5/821    most recent
ben010v1
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 Peach, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow B12 - Classical
Right arrow B31 - Individuals
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

A note of dissent on the ‘index number’ interpretation of Adam Smith's ‘real measure’

Terry Peach*

* Southwest University of Finance & Economics, Chengdu, China and University of Manchester, UK

Address for correspondence: email: terry.peach{at}manchester.ac.uk

This paper offers a critical comment on the interpretation that Adam Smith's ‘real measure of exchangeable value’ was addressed, at least in part, to the index number problem of estimating intertemporal changes in general purchasing power. It is argued that the ‘real measure’ is incapable of performing such a role, that Smith was aware of its limitations in this respect, and that commentators have been misled by his (legitimate) use of the measure in more restrictive contexts.

Key Words: Adam Smith • real measure of exchangeable value

JEL classifications: B12, B31

Manuscript received April 7, 2007; final version received January 22, 2008.


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




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.