Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Review of Radical Political Economics
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fine, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

"Economic imperialism": a view from the periphery

Ben Fine

Department of Economics, University of London, Russell Square, Thornhaugh Street, London WEIH OXG, UK; Tel.: +44-207-898-4527; fax: +44-207-898-4559

Edward P. Lazear, a leading neoclassical economist specializing in labor economics, has recently argued that economic imperialism is successfully colonizing other social sciences as a result of its own scientific status. His account, however, leaves several lacunae, including an explanation for the depth, variety, and timing of economic imperialism. These issues are addressed by emphasizing the importance of recent developments in micro-foundations in rendering economics more palatable to other social sciences that are themselves retreating from the extremes of influence of postmodernism and, like economics, neoliberalism. Further, once questioning the claims of economics as the only rigorous science, and recognizing the understandable antipathies to it by other disciplines, then the latter's interest in renewing contact with the economic is liable to see debate emerge over how to analyze the economy. In this, radical political economy and heterodox economics can play a part, even though they have been dismissed by mainstream economics itself.

Key Words: Economic imperialism • Economics • Social science

Review of Radical Political Economics, Vol. 34, No. 2, 187-201 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/048661340203400205
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Philosophy of the Social SciencesHome page
U. Maki
Economics Imperialism: Concept and Constraints
Philosophy of the Social Sciences, September 1, 2009; 39(3): 351 - 380.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
A. Brown, A. Charlwood, C. Forde, and D. Spencer
Job quality and the economics of New Labour: a critical appraisal using subjective survey data
Camb. J. Econ., November 1, 2007; 31(6): 941 - 971.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Theory and Research in EducationHome page
I. Robeyns
Three models of education: Rights, capabilities and human capital
Theory and Research in Education, March 1, 2006; 4(1): 69 - 84.
[Abstract] [PDF]