The Death of Neoclassical Economics

By D. Colander. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2000

437 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A companion to the history of economic thought (2003, background): “Colander (2000) again treads where angels fear to go.”
The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy (2007, background): “It has recently been argued that mainstream economics is in a process of transformation driven by the emergence of a collection of new research programmes over the last two decades all of which make important departures from standard neoclassical economics (Colander, 2000; Colander et al., 2004; Dav”
The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism? (2006, background): “Another way of putting the concerns of this paper is to ask, following David Colander (2000), whether not only is the term ‘neoclassical economics’ dead as a characterization of current mainstream economics, but whether it is dead as a characterization of how mainstream economics is currently evolvi”
The changing face of mainstream economics (2004, background): “…one of the most distinguished current historians of economic thought, has pointed out that, beginning as early as the 1950s, the classification ‘neoclassical economics’ was no longer appropriate to characterize modern economics (Blaug, 1998, p. 2), an argument further developed by Colander (2000a).”