Mainstream economics deals with allocation and income distribution in neoclassical fashion, while the macro-economics of underspending and overspending are handled in a neo-Keynesian spirit. The question is whether this type of eclectic synthesis can be reproached for being inconsistent. The author tries to answer this question for a situation of low investment, low profits, low employment, unused capacity and a wage-price spiral. He argues that, though some elements of the neo-classical allocation and distribution theory are lost, the main neo-classical body can cope with situations of underspending. However, not without limits. Outside a ‘corridor’ á la Leijonhufvud, situations may arise where the eclectic synthesis may fail. The author enumerates ten factors determining the boundaries of such a corridor.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
About this article
Cite this article
Pen, J. On eclecticism, or we are (almost) all neo-classical neo-Keynesians now. De Economist 129, 127–150 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01705870
- International Economic
- Public Finance
- Income Distribution
- Distribution Theory
- Mainstream Economics