Relationships between Modern Austrian and SRAFFA’s Capital Theory

  • Malte Faber
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 277)


Capital theory is notoriously known to be a field of controversies not few of which are due to misunderstandings. There are, for example, many articles and books which deal with the two Cambridge schools. As far as I know there is no paper dealing with relationships between the Austrian and SRAFFA’s capital theory. Since I have repeatedly been questioned on this topic I will try to fill some part of this gap. In Section 2 I outline our approach of modern Austrian capital theory and in Section 3 I give a brief introduction to SRAFFA’s book PRODUCTION OF COMMODITIES BY MEANS OF COMMODITIES (SRAFFA [1960]), which will be the basis of our comparison with the neo-Austrian capital theory in Secton 4.


Economic Literature Capital Good Austrian School Balance Growth Path Profit Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arrow, K.J. and D.A. Starrett, [1973], “Cost and Demand-Theoretical Approaches to the Theory of Price Determination,” in: J.R. Hicks and W. Weber (eds.), Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford/129–148.Google Scholar
  2. Atlantic Economic Journal 6, No.3, September [19 78]. (This volume contains solely papers on Carl Menger.)Google Scholar
  3. Beckmann, M.J.[1971], “The Period of Production in a von Neumann Model/” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, Suppl.1,3–10.Google Scholar
  4. Bernholz, P. [1971], “Superiority of Roundabout Processes and Positive Rate of Interest. A Simple Model of Capital and Growth,” Kyklos, 24, 687–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernholz, P. [1972], Grundlagen der Politischen Ökonomie, Vol.1, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  6. Bernholz, P. and M. Faber, [1973], “Technical Productivity of Roundabout Processes and Positive Rate of Interest. A Capital Model with Depreciation and η-Period Horizon,” Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 129, 46–61.Google Scholar
  7. Bernholz, P. and M. Faber [1978], “Steady State and Superiority of Roundaboutness: A Comparison between the Neoclassical and a Neo-Austrian Approach,” Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 134, 703–711.Google Scholar
  8. Bernholz, P., M. Faber, and W. Reiss [1978], “A Neo-Austrian Two Period Multi-Sector Model of Capital,” Journal of Economic Theory, 17, 38–50. (Reprinted in this volume.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Böge, W., M. Faber and W. Güth [1982], “A Dynamic Game with Macroeconomic Investment Decisions under Alternative Market Structure,” in: Games, Economic Dynamics, and Time Series Analysis, Physica-Verlag Wien, Würzburg, 227–250. (Reprinted in this volume.)Google Scholar
  10. Böhm-Bawerk, E.v. [1962], “Macht oder ökonomisches Gesetz?”, Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft, Sozialpolitik und Verwaltung, 23, 1914, 205–271. (Translated into English: “Control or Economic Law?,” in: Shorter Classics of Böhm-Bawerk, Libertarian Press 1962.Google Scholar
  11. Böhm-Bawerk, E.v. [1921], Positive Theorie des Kapitals, Volume 1, 4th edition, Jena.Google Scholar
  12. Borch, K. [1973], “The Place of Uncertainty in Theories of the Austrian School,” in: J.R. Hicks and W. Weber (eds.), Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford 61–74.Google Scholar
  13. Bruno, M., E. Burmeister, and E. Sheshinski [1966], “The Nature and Implications of the Reswitching of Techniques,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80, 526–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burmeister, E. [1968], “On a Theorem of Sraffa,” Economica, 35, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Burmeister, E. [1974], “Synthesizing the Neo-Austrian and Alternative Approaches to Capital Theory: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Literature, 12, 413–456.Google Scholar
  16. Burmeister, E. [1975], “A Comment on ‘This Age of Leontief... and Who?’,” Journal of Economic Literature, 13, 454–457.Google Scholar
  17. Burmeister, E. [1977], “The Irrelevance of Sraffa’s Analysis without Constant Returns to Scale,” Journal of Economic Literature, 15, 68–72.Google Scholar
  18. Eatwell, J. [1977], “The Irrelevance of Returns to Scale in Sraffa’s Analysis,” Journal of Economic Literature, 15, 61–67.Google Scholar
  19. Faber, M. [1973], “Einstimmigkeitsregel und Einkommensumverteilung,” Kyklos, 26, 836–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Faber, M. [1979], Introduction to Modem Austrian Capital Theory, Lecture Notes in Economies and Mathematical Systems, 167, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fehl, U. [1973], Produktionsfunktion und Produktionsperiode. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit dem Grundbegriff der temporalen Kapitaltheorie, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  22. Fehl, U. [1975], “Technischer Fortschritt und Beschäftigung in kapitaltheoretischer Sicht,” Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-und Sozialwissenschaften, 95, 135–170.Google Scholar
  23. Fehl, U. [1976], “Die durchschnittliche Produktionsperiode als Grundbegriff der temporalen Kapitaltheorie,” Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 190, 289–315.Google Scholar
  24. Gram, H.N. and V.C. Walsh [1978], “Menger and Jevons in the Setting of Post-von Neumann-Sraffa Economics,” Atlantic Economic Journal, 6, 46–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hagemann, H. and H.-D. Kurz [1976], “The Return of the Same Truncation Period and Reswitching of Techniques in Neo-Austrian and More General Models,” Kyklos, 29, 678–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harcourt, G.C. [1972], Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hicks, J.R. [1970], “The Neo-Austrian Growth Theory,” The Economic Journal, 80, 257–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hicks, J.R. [1973], Capital and Time. A Neo-Austrian Theory, Oxford.Google Scholar
  29. Hicks, J.R. [1973a], “The Austrian Theory of Capital and its Rebirth in Modern Economics,” in: J.R. Hicks and W. Weber (eds.), Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford, 190–206.Google Scholar
  30. Hicks, J.R. [1976], “Some Questions of Time in Economics,” in: A.M. Tang, F.M. Westfield and J.S. Worley (eds.), Evolution, Welfare, Time in Economics, Toronto, 135–151.Google Scholar
  31. Hicks, J.R. and W. Weber (eds.) [1973], Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford.Google Scholar
  32. Howard, M.C. [1980], “Austrian Capital Theory: An Evaluation in Terms of Piero Sraffa’s Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities,” Metroeconomica, 32, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jaksch, H.J. [1975a], “Die Mehrergiebigkeit längerer Produktionsumwege in einem linearen Vielsektorenmodell,” Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 131, 92–105.Google Scholar
  34. Jaksch, H.J. [1975b], “Effizienz und Minderschätzung künftiger Bedürfnisse in einem linearen Vielsektorenmodell,” 87–104, in: O. Becker und R. Richter (eds.), Dynamische Wirtschaftsanalyse, Heinz Sauermann zum 70.Geburtstag, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  35. Kirzner, J.M. [1978], “The Entrepreneurial Role in Menger’s System,” Atlantic Economic Journal, 6, 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levine, A.L. [1974], “This Age of Leontief... and Who? An Interpretation,” Journal of Economic Literature, 12, 872–881.Google Scholar
  37. Levine, A.L. [1975], “This Age of Leontief... and Who? A Reply,” Journal of Economic Literature, 13, 457–461.Google Scholar
  38. Levine, A.L. [1977], “The Irrelevance of Returns to Scale in Sraffa’s Analysis: A Comment,” Journal of Economic Literature, 15, 70–72.Google Scholar
  39. Maier, G. [1984], Rohstoffe und Innovation. Eine dynamische Untersuchung, Mathematical Systems in Economics, Vol.89, Verlagsgruppe Athenäum, Hain, Hanstein.Google Scholar
  40. Menger, C. [1923], Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre, 2nd. ed., Leipzig.Google Scholar
  41. Menger, K. [1934], “Das Unsicherheitsmoment in der Wertlehre,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 5, 459–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miyao, T. [1977], “A Generalization of Sraffa’s Standard Commodity and its Complete Characterization,” International Economic Review, 18, 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moss, L.S. [1978], “Carl Menger’s Theory of Exchange Atlantic,” Economic Journal, 6, 17–30.Google Scholar
  44. Nell, E.J. [1971], “Theories of Growth and Theories of Value,” in: G.C. Harcourt and N.F. Laing (eds.), Capital and Growth, Harmondsworth, 196–210.Google Scholar
  45. Newman, P. [1962], “Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities,” Schweizer Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Statistik, 98, 58–75.Google Scholar
  46. Orosel, G.O. [1979], “A Reformulation of the Austrian Theory of Capital and its Application to the Debate on Reswitching and Related Paradoxa,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 39, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pasinetti, L. [1959/60], “A Mathematical Formulation of the Ricardian System,” Review of Economic Studies, 27, 78–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pasinetti, L. [1977], Lectures on the Theory of Production, New York.Google Scholar
  49. Reetz, N. [1971], Produktionsfunktion und Produktionsperiode. Kritische Darstellung des Produktionsperiodenmodells Böhm-Bawerkschen Typs und Vergleich mit der neoklassischen Wachstumstheorie, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  50. Reetz, N. [1976], Zeitlicher Produktionsablauf und Kapitalakkumulation, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  51. Reiss, W. [1979], “Substitution in a Neo-Austrian Model of Capital,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 39, 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reiss, W. and M. Faber [1982], “Own Rates of Interest in a General Multisector Model of Capital,” in: M. Deistler, E. Fürst, and G. Schwödiauer (eds.), Games, Economic Dynamics, and Time Series Analysis, Physica-Verlag, Wien, Würzburg, 194–209. (Reprinted in this volume.)Google Scholar
  53. Ricardo, D. [1817], On the Priciples of Political Economy and Taxation, London.Google Scholar
  54. Robinson, J. [1960a], “The Rate of Interest,” in: J. Robinson, Collected Economic Papers, Vol.2, Oxford, 246–265.Google Scholar
  55. Robinson, J. [1960b], “Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory,” in: J. Robinson, Collected Economic Papers, Vols.3, Oxford, 7–14.Google Scholar
  56. Robinson, J. [1965], “Solow on the Rate of Return,” in: J. Robinson: Collected Economic Papers, Vol.3, Oxford, 36–47.Google Scholar
  57. Rothschild, K.W. [1973], “Distributive Aspects of the Austrian Theory,” in: J.R. Hicks and W. Weber (eds.), Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford, 205–225.Google Scholar
  58. Schefold, B. [1976], “Einige Grundthesen des Buchs, mathematisch formuliert,” in: P. Sraffa, Warenproduktion mittels Waren, Nachworte von B.Schefold, Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  59. Schefold, B. [1978], “On Counting Equations,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 38, 253–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schefold, B. [1980], “Von Neumann and Sraffa: Mathematical Equivalence and Conceptual Difference,” Economic Journal, 90, 140–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sraffa, P. (ed.) [1951], The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  62. Sraffa, P. [1960], Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Prelude to Critique of Economic Theory, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  63. Streissler, E. [1969], “Structural Economic Thought. On the Significance of the Austrian School today,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 29, 237–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Streissler, E. [1972], “To what Extent Was the Austrian School Marginalist?,” History of Political Economy, 4, 426–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tintner, E. [1970], “Lineare Methoden der Nationalökonomie und die Produktionsperiode von Böhm-Bawerk,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 30, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Weizsäcker, C.C.v. [1971a], Steady State Capital Theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Weizsäcker, C.C.v. [1971b], “Die zeitliche Struktur des Produktionsprozesses und das Problem der Einkommensverteilung zwischen Kapital und Arbeit,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 106, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Weizsäcker, C.C.v. [1974], “Substitution Along the Time Axis,” Kyklos, 27, 732–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malte Faber

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations