Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-14T02:21:58.058Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CLOSING THE MODEL? THE HARROD–MARSCHAK CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DRAFT OF THE “ESSAY IN DYNAMIC THEORY”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2010

FLORENCIA SEMBER
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During August and September 1938, Harrod discussed a first draft of his “Essay in Dynamic Theory” with Keynes and Marschak. The aim of this paper is to discuss Harrod’s correspondence with Marschak in the light of the subsequent interpretations of the “Essay.” Firstly, we show how Marschak focused on some of the features of Harrod’s theory that would later give rise to widely different interpretations and some misunderstandings. Three issues in particular have been broadly debated in the literature: the concept of warranted rate of growth; instability; and non-linearity. Secondly, we show that a possible reason why Harrod neglected Marschak’s remarks lies in their respective methodological approaches. While Marschak tried to frame Harrod’s theory by means of a closed model, Harrod thought that the analysis of equilibrium and of the succession of states belonged to separate stages; this made building a complete model difficult at this stage, when he was presenting a “new tool of analysis.” In spite of their respective conflicting approaches, Marschak’s comments remain of great importance, and if Harrod had followed some of his advice, his theory would probably have improved in several respects, and certainly it would have been clearer and less ambiguous.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 583 - 608
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alexander, Sidney. 1950. “Mr. Harrod’s Dynamic Model.” The Economic Journal 60 (240): 724–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumol, William J. 1948. “Notes on Some Dynamic Models.” The Economic Journal 58 (232): 506–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1995. “From The Trade Cycle to the ‘Essay in Dynamic Theory’: The Harrod–Keynes Correspondence, 1937–1938.” History of Political Economy 27 (2): 309–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1996a. “An Additional Note on Harrod–Keynes Correspondence.” History of Political Economy 28 (2): 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1996b. “Introduction To ‘An Essay in Dynamic Theory’: 1938 Draft by Roy F. Harrod.” History of Political Economy 28 (2): 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1998a. “Failing to Win Consent: Harrod’s Dynamics in the Eyes of His Readers.” In Rampa, G., Stella, L., and Thirlwall, A. P., eds., Economic Dynamics, Trade and Growth: Essays on Harrodian Themes. London: Macmillan, pp. 38–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1998b. “Harrod and the ‘Time-Lag Theories of the Cycle.’” In Rampa, G., Stella, L., and Thirlwall, A. P., eds., Economic Dynamics, Trade and Growth: Essays on Harrodian Themes. London: Macmillan, pp. 107–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 1999. The Making of Harrod’s Dynamics. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besomi, Daniele. 2001. “Harrod’s Dynamics and the Theory of Growth: The Story of a Mistaken Attribution.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 25 (1): 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodenhorn, Diran. 1956. “The Stability of Growth Models.” The American Economic Review 46 (4): 607–631.Google Scholar
Domar, Evsey. 1946. “Capital Expansion, Rate of Growth and Employment.” Econometrica 14 (1): 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, Ragnar. 1933. “Propagation Problems and Impulse Problems in Dynamic Economics.” In Economic Essays in Honour of Gustav Cassel. London: Allen & Unwin, pp. 171–205.Google Scholar
Frisch, Ragnar. 1936. “On the Notion of Equilibrium and Disequilibrium.” The Review of Economic Studies 3 (2): 100–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1936. The Trade Cycle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1938. “Scope and Method of Economics.” The Economic Journal 48 (191): 383–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1939. “An Essay in Dynamic Theory.” The Economic Journal 49 (193): 14–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1951. “Notes on Trade Cycle Theory.” The Economic Journal 61 (242): 261–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1952. “Supplement on Dynamic Theory.” In Economic Essays. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1968. “What Is a Model?” In Wolfe, J. N., ed., Value, Capital and Growth: Papers in Honour of Sir John Hicks. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 173–191.Google Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1970. “Harrod after Twenty-One Years: A Comment.” The Economic Journal 80 (319): 737–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 1996, “‘An Essay in Dynamic Theory’: 1938 Draft,” ed. Besomi, D.. History of Political Economy 28 (2): 253–280.Google Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 2003a. The Collected Interwar Papers and Correspondence of Roy Harrod, ed. Besomi, D.. Three volumes. Celtenham UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Harrod, Roy F. 2003b. “An Essay in Dynamic Theory [1938 Draft].” In Besomi, D., ed., The Collected Interwar Papers and Correspondence of Roy Harrod. Celtenham UK: Edward Elgar, Vol. 3, pp. 1188–1212.Google Scholar
Hawtrey, Ralph G. 1939. “Mr. Harrod’s Essay in Dynamic Theory.” The Economic Journal 49 (195): 468–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, John. 1950. A Contribution to the Theory of the Trade Cycle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, Dale W. 1960. “On Stability in the Sense of Harrod.” Economica 27 (107): 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kregel, Jan A. 1980. “Economic Dynamics and the Theory of Steady Growth: An Historical Essay on Harrod’s ‘Knife-Edge.’” History of Political Economy 12 (1): 97–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marschak, Jacob. 1941. “Methods in Economics: A Discussion.” The Journal of Political Economy 49 (3): 441–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marschak, Jacob. 1942. “Identity and Stability in Economics: A Survey.” Econometrica 10 (1): 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCord Wright, David. 1949. “Mr. Harrod and Growth Economics.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 31 (4): 322–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevile, John W. 1962. “The Mathematical Formulation of Harrod’s Growth Model.” The Economic Journal 72 (286): 367–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevile, John W. 2003. “Expectations, Lags and Particular Parameter Values in Harrod’s Dynamics.” History of Economics Review 37 (Winter): 100–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevile, John W., and Kriesler, P.. 2008. “Escaping from a Blind Alley: Disequilibrium in the Dynamic Analysis of Harrod and Kalecki.” Australian School of Business Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
Robinson, Joan. 1970. “Harrod after Twenty-One Years.” The Economic Journal 80 (319): 731–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1939. “A Synthesis of the Principle of Acceleration and the Multiplier.” The Journal of Political Economy 47 (6): 786–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schelling, Thomas C. 1947. “Capital Growth and Equilibrium.” The American Economic Review 37 (5): 864–876.Google Scholar
Young, Warren. 1989. Harrod and His Trade Cycle Group. New York: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Warren., and Lee, F. S.. 1993. Oxford Economic & Oxford Economists. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar