Pluralism is frequently supported by heterodox economists, but their rationale for it is not always transparent. It could be advocated for strategic reasons, as a response to the institutional power of orthodoxy, or for fundamental reasons, as a program for how economics should best be done. This paper evaluates strategic pluralism, compares it with the alternative of strategic monism, and relates both strategies to long-term objectives.
ArnspergerC.VaroufakisY.2006. What is neoclassical economics?Post-Autistic Economics Review38: Article 1.
2.
AspromourgosT.2004. Sraffian research programmes and unorthodox economics. Review of Political Economy16 (2): 179–206.
3.
BaghramianM.2004. Relativism. London: Routledge.
4.
BeedC.BeedC.1996. Measuring the quality of economics journals: The case of economics. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics18 (3): 369–96.
5.
BigoV.NegruI.2008. From fragmentation to ontologically reflexive pluralism. Journal of Philosophical Economics1 (2): 127–50.
6.
BoettkeP. J.2002. Information and knowledge: Austrian economics in search of its uniqueness. Review of Austrian Economics15 (4): 263–74.
7.
ColanderD. C.2010. Moving beyond the rhetoric of pluralism: Suggestions for an “inside-the-mainstream” heterodoxy. In Economic Pluralism, ed. GarnettR. F.OlsenE. K.StarrM., 36–47. London: Routledge.
8.
ColanderD. C.2014. The wrong type of pluralism: Toward a transdisciplinary social science. Review of Political Economy26 (4): 516–25.
9.
ColanderD. C.HoltR. P. F.RosserJ. B.2004. The changing face of mainstream economics. Review of Political Economy16 (4): 485–99.
10.
CorsiM.D’IppolitiC.LucidiF.2010. Pluralism at risk? Heterodox economic approaches and the evaluation of economic research in Italy. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology69 (5): 1495–529.
11.
CroninB.2010. The diffusion of heterodox economics. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology69 (5): 1475–494.
12.
DavidsonP.2004. A response to King’s argument for pluralism. Post-Autistic Economics Review24: Article1.
13.
DavisJ. B.2006. The turn in economics: Neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?Journal of Institutional Economics2 (1): 1–20.
14.
DavisJ. B.2007. Why is economics not yet a pluralistic science?Post-Autistic Economics Review43:42–51.
15.
DavisJ. B.2008. The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy. Cambridge Journal of Economics32 (3): 349–66.
16.
DavisJ. B.2009. The nature of heterodox economics. In Ontology and Economics: Tony Lawson and His Critics, ed. FullbrookE., 83–92. London: Routledge.
17.
DavisJ. B.2014. Pluralism and anti-pluralism in economics: The atomistic individual and religious fundamentalism. Review of Political Economy26 (4): 495–502.
18.
De LangheR. 2010. How monist is heterodoxy?Cambridge Journal of Economics34 (4): 793–805.
19.
DequechD.2002. The demarcation between the “old” and the “new” institutional economics: Recent complications. Journal of Economic Issues36 (2): 565–72.
20.
DequechD.2008. Neoclassical, mainstream, orthodox, and heterodox economics. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics30 (2): 279–302.
21.
DequechD.2014. The institutions of economics: A first approximation. Journal of Economic Issues48 (2): 523–31.
22.
DobuschL.KapellerJ.2009. “Why is economics not an evolutionary science?” New answers to Veblen’s old question. Journal of Economic Issues43 (4): 867–98.
23.
DobuschL.KapellerJ.2012. Heterodox United vs. Mainstream City? Sketching a framework for interested pluralism in economics. Journal of Economic Issues46 (4): 1035–1058.
24.
DowS. C.2000. Prospects for the progress of heterodox economics. Journal of the History of Economic Thought22 (2): 157–70.
25.
DowS. C.2004. Structured pluralism. Journal of Economic Methodology11 (3): 275–90.
26.
DowS. C.2008. A future for schools of thought and pluralism in heterodox economics. In Future Directions for Heterodox Economics, ed. HarveyJ. T.GarnettR. F.9–26. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
27.
DowS. C.2011. Heterodox economics: History and prospects. Cambridge Journal of Economics35 (6): 1151–65.
28.
DowdD. F.2004. Capitalism and Its Economics: A Critical History. London: Pluto Press.
29.
DuttA. K.2014. Dimensions of pluralism in economics. Review of Political Economy26 (4): 479–94.
30.
DuttA. K.2015. Uncertainty, power, institutions, and crisis: Implications for economic analysis and the future of capitalism. Review of Keynesian Economics3 (1): 9–28.
31.
EarlP. E.2008. In the economics classroom. In Pluralist Economics, ed. FullbrookE., 193–214. London: Zed Books.
32.
EarlP. E.PengT.-C.2012. Brands of economics and the Trojan Horse of pluralism. Review of Political Economy24 (3): 451–67.
33.
FoleyD. K.2004. Rationality and ideology in economics. Social Research: An International Quarterly71 (2): 329–42.
34.
FreemanA.KlimanA.2006. Beyond talking the talk: Towards a critical pluralist practice. Post-Autistic Economics Review40:26–53.
GiereR. N.2006. Perspectival pluralism. In Scientific Pluralism, ed. KellertS. H.LonginoH. E.WatersC. K., 26–41. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
41.
GilliesD.2012. Economics and research assessment systems. Economic Thought1 (1): 23–47.
42.
HarréR.KrauszM.1996. Varieties of Relativism. Oxford: Blackwell.
43.
HartN.KrieslerP.2014. Keynes, Kalecki, Sraffa: Coherence? (UNSW Australian School of Business Research Paper No. 2014 ECON 06). Sydney: University of New South Wales.
44.
HodgsonG. M.1999. Evolution and Institutions: On Evolutionary Economics and the Evolution of Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
45.
HodgsonG. M.2007. Evolutionary and institutional economics as the new mainstream?Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review4 (1): 7–25.
46.
HodgsonG. M.RothmanH.1999. The editors and authors of economics journals: A case of institutional oligopoly?Economic Journal109 (453): F165–86.
47.
HolcombeR. G.2008. Pluralism versus heterodoxy in economics and the social sciences. Journal of Philosophical Economics1 (2): 51–72.
48.
HoltR. P. F.2007. What is post Keynesian economics? In Post-Keynesian Macroeconomics: Essays in Honour of Ingrid Rima, ed. ForstaterM.MongioviG.PressmanS.89–107. London: Routledge.
49.
HopkinsB. E.2010. The institutional barriers to heterodox pluralism. Review of Radical Political Economics42 (3): 338–43.
50.
HuntingtonS. P.1957. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
JacksonW. A.2009. Economics, Culture and Social Theory. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
52.
JacksonW. A.2013. The desocialising of economic theory. International Journal of Social Economics40 (9): 809–25.
53.
KapellerJ.2010. Some critical notes on citation metrics and heterodox economics. Review of Radical Political Economics42 (3): 330–37.
54.
KingJ. E.2002. Three arguments for pluralism in economics. Journal of Australian Political Economy50:82–88.
55.
KocherM. G.SutterM.2001. The institutional concentration of authors in top journals of economics during the last two decades. Economic Journal111 (472): 405–21.
56.
KuhnT. S.1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
57.
LavoieM.2011. Should Sraffian economics be dropped out of the Post-Keynesian school?Economies et Sociétés45 (7): 1027–1059.
LawsonT.2006. The nature of heterodox economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics30 (4): 483–505.
60.
LawsonT.2010. Ontology, modern economics, and pluralism. In Economic Pluralism, ed. GarnettR. F.OlsenE. K.StarrM., 99–113. London: Routledge.
61.
LawsonT.2013. What is this “school” called neoclassical economics?Cambridge Journal of Economics37 (5): 947–83.
62.
LeeF. S.2006. The ranking game, class, and scholarship in American mainstream economics. Australasian Journal of Economics Education3 (1&2): 1–41.
63.
LeeF. S.2007. The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities. Cambridge Journal of Economics31 (2): 309–25.
64.
LeeF. S.2009. A History of Heterodox Economics: Challenging the Mainstream in the Twentieth Century. London: Routledge.
65.
LeeF. S.2011. The pluralism debate in heterodox economics. Review of Radical Political Economics43 (4): 540–51.
66.
LeeF. S.2012. Heterodox economics and its critics. Review of Political Economy24 (2): 337–51.
67.
LeeF. S.ElsnerW.2008. Publishing, ranking, and the future of heterodox economics. On the Horizon16 (4): 176–84.
68.
LeeF. S.HarleyS.1998. Peer review, the Research Assessment Exercise and the demise of non-mainstream economics. Capital & Class22 (3): 23–51.
69.
LeeF. S.JoT.-H.2011. Social surplus approach and heterodox economics. Journal of Economic Issues45 (4): 857–76.
70.
LeeF. S.PhamX.GuG.2013. The UK Research Assessment Exercise and the narrowing of UK economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics37 (4): 693–717.
71.
LewinP.2001. The development of Austrian economics: Revisiting the neoclassical divide. Review of Austrian Economics14 (4): 239–50.
72.
MäkiU., ed. 2002. Fact and Fiction in Economics: Models, Realism and Social Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
73.
MearmanA.2011a. Pluralism, heterodoxy, and the rhetoric of distinction. Review of Radical Political Economics43 (4): 552–61.
74.
MearmanA.2011b. Who do heterodox economists think they are?The American Journal of Economics and Sociology70 (2): 480–510.
75.
MearmanA.2012. “Heterodox economics” and the problems of classification. Journal of Economic Methodology19 (4): 407–24.
76.
MirowskiP.1989. More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77.
MongioviG.2012. Sraffian economics. In The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics, 2nd ed., ed. KingJ. E., 499–505. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
78.
NegruI.2009. Reflections on pluralism in economics. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education1 (1–2): 7–21.
79.
NegruI.2010. Plurality to pluralism in economics pedagogy: The role of critical thinking. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education1 (3): 185–93.
80.
NellE. J.1992. Transformational Growth and Effective Demand: Economics after the Capital Critique. London: Macmillan.
81.
NelsonJ. A.2009. The principles course. In The Handbook of Pluralist Economics Education, ed. ReardonJ., 57–68. London: Routledge.
82.
O’DonnellR.2010. Economic pluralism and skill formation: Adding value to students, economies and societies. In Economic Pluralism, ed. GarnettR. F.OlsenE. K.StarrM., 262–77. London: Routledge.
83.
PaganoU.2004. The economics of institutions and the institutions of economics. In Transforming Economics: Perspectives on the Critical Realist Project, ed. LewisP., 252–67. London: Routledge.
84.
PanayotakisC.2013. Theorizing scarcity: Neoclassical economics and its critics. Review of Radical Political Economics45 (2): 183–200.
85.
PietersR.BaumgartnerH.2002. Who talks to whom? Intra- and interdisciplinary communication of economics journals. Journal of Economic Perspectives40 (2): 483–509.
86.
ReardonJ.2008. Barriers to entry: Heterodox publishing in mainstream journals. On the Horizon16 (4): 185–97.
87.
RosenS.1997. Austrian and neoclassical economics: Any gains from trade?Journal of Economic Perspectives11 (4): 139–52.
88.
RutherfordM.1995. The old and the new institutionalism: Can bridges be built?Journal of Economic Issues29 (2): 443–51.
89.
SalantiA.ScrepantiE. eds. 1997. Pluralism in Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
90.
SentE.-M.2003. Pleas for pluralism. Post-Autistic Economics Review18: Article1.
91.
SentE.-M.2006. Pluralisms in economics. In Scientific Pluralism, ed. KellertS. H.LonginoH. E.WatersC. K., 80–101. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
92.
SöderbaumP.2004. Economics as ideology and the need for pluralism. In A Guide to What’s Wrong with Economics, ed. FullbrookE., 158–68. London: Anthem Press.
93.
StilwellF. J. B.2012. Political Economy: The Contest of Economic Ideas, 3rd ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
94.
Van BouwelJ. 2004. Explanatory pluralism in economics: Against the mainstream?Philosophical Explorations7 (3): 299–315.
95.
Van BouwelJ. 2005. Towards a framework for pluralism in economics. Post-Autistic Economics Review31: Article3.
