Keynes, Sraffa and the Emergence of the General Theory: Some Thoughts

This note looks into the issue of whether or not Sraffa had any significant influence on Keynes’s thinking in the period of preparation of the General Theory. Questioning the view recently expressed by Pasinetti (2007), we suggest there is reason to surmise that Sraffa may have pointed Keynes to a way of escape from the traditional conception of the rate of interest, a line of thought which Keynes developed into the liquidity preference explanation of interest on money.General Theory (Emergence); LIquidity Preference; Sraffa; Own Rates

(WP 2011-02) The Change in Sraffa\u27s Philosophical Thinking

The availability of Piero Sraffa’s unpublished manuscripts and correspondence at Trinity College Library, Cambridge, has made it possible to begin to set out a more complete account of Sraffa’s philosophical thinking than previously could be done with only his published materials and the few comments and suggestions made by others about his ideas, especially in connection with their possible impact on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s later thinking. This makes a direct rather than indirect examination of Sraffa’s philosophical thinking possible, and also shifts the focus from his relationship to Wittgenstein to his own thinking per se. I suggest that the previous focus, necessary as it may have been prior to the availability of the unpublished materials, involved some distortion of Sraffa’s thinking by virtue of its framing in terms of Wittgenstein’s concerns as reflected in the concerns of scholars primarily interested in the change in the his thinking. This paper seeks to locate these early convictions in this historical context, and then go on to treat the development of Sraffa’s philosophical thinking as a process beginning from this point, arguing that his thinking underwent one significant shift around 1931, but still retained its early key assumptions. Thus the approach I will take to Sraffa’s philosophical thinking is to explain it as a process of development largely within a single framework defined by his view of how modern science determines the scope and limits upon economic theorizing

The Change in Sraffa\u27s Philosophical Thinking

The availability of Piero Sraffa\u27s unpublished manuscripts and correspondence at Trinity College Library, Cambridge, has made it possible to begin to set out a more complete account of Sraffa\u27s philosophical thinking than previously could be done with only his published materials and the few comments and suggestions made by others about his ideas, especially in connection with their possible impact on Ludwig Wittgenstein\u27s later thinking. This makes a direct rather than indirect examination of Sraffa\u27s philosophical thinking possible, and also shifts the focus from his relationship to Wittgenstein to his own thinking per se. I suggest that the previous focus, necessary as it may have been prior to the availability of the unpublished materials, involved some distortion of Sraffa\u27s thinking by virtue of its framing in terms of Wittgenstein\u27s concerns as reflected in the concerns of scholars primarily interested in the change in his thinking. This paper seeks to locate these early convictions in this historical context, and then go on to treat the development of Sraffa\u27s philosophical thinking as a process beginning from this point, arguing that his thinking underwent one significant shift around 1931, but still retained its early key assumptions. Thus the approach I will take to Sraffa\u27s philosophical thinking is to explain it as a process of development largely within a single framework defined by his view of how modern science determines the scope and limits upon economic theorising

Structural models and structural change: analytical principles and methodological issues

Structural analysis is the main topic of this paper and structural change is a dominant theme of the present work. The analysis of structural models and of theories of structural changes carried out in this paper has a double meaning. On the one hand, it allows to pick up several essential principles that characterize these models, on the other hand, it should allow us to reconsider some important methodological issues under a new light, such as different methods of decomposition of the productive systems, the problem of complexity and the strategies to reduce complexity. Moreover, the paper tries to compare Quesnay’s Tableau, taken as a benchmark model, with Leontief’s, von Neumann’s and Sraffa’s models to pick up the different features of these models with respect to his theoretical framework and also to identify their characteristics for structural analysis and structural change.

Constant returns to scale and economic theories of value

Jointly with Erkko Etula, Paul Samuelson [2006] claims that the “Leontief – Sraffa matrix equations for input/output must obey constant returns to scale”. However, in an unrelated work, Amartya Sen [2003] claims that Sraffa’s [1960] “analysis does not need any assumption of constant returns to scale.” In fact, Sraffa’s model cannot satisfy this property because it is impossible to define constant returns to scale in it. This claim is considerably stronger than Sen’s. The property of constant returns to scale is significant because it constitutes a line of demarcation between distinct, though interrelated, economic theories of value. (96 words)Constant returns to scale; Theory of Value; Relations of production; Counterfactual information; Exchange Values; Classical Political Economy; Neoclassical theory; Leontief technology

Líneas posibles de avance del modelo de Sraffa

Several historical and ideological considerations have prevented the diffusion of the Sraffa´s masterpiece Production of commodities by means commodities. The Sraffa´s book has been studied by economists such as Garegnani, Abraham-Frois, Pasinetti, Steedman, Kurz, Roncaglia, etc. but these authors comment on some mathematical aspects of the mentioned book without developing his theoretical and economic analysis. This article makes some considerations about the Sraffa´s book trying to develop his same reasoning.Diversas consideraciones históricas e ideológicas han impedido la difusión de la obra fundamental de Sraffa Producción de mercancías por medio de mercancías. La obra de Sraffa ha sido estudiada fundamentalmente en sus aspectos matemáticos por economistas tales como Garegnani, Abraham-Frois, Pasinetti, Steedman, Kurz, Roncaglia, etc. pero sin desarrollar apenas sus aspectos teóricos y económicos. En este artículo se hacen algunas consideraciones sobre posibles desarrollos del libro de Sraffa a partir de su propio esquema de pensamiento

Sraffa’s Ricardo after Fifty Years - A Preliminary Estimate

It is the purpose of this paper to put Sraffa's Ricardo (Ricardo, 1951-73) in a historical perspective. After almost fifty years this appears to be timely on two grounds. First, as we shall have occasion to recall below, Sraffa had been singularly enshrined and made into a bloodless entity for a considerable time; only today it becomes possible to revive his image in flesh and blood and it seems proper to do so. Second the Sraffa archives at Trinity College have now been made accessible and it is expected that permission can be granted to make use of the extant documents for the purpose.

Demystifying Sraffa’s Theory of Value in the Light of Arrow and Debreu

This paper compares the models of Arrow and Debreu [1954] and Sraffa [1960], and concludes that (1) the models are informationally distinct conceptions of a capitalist economy, (2) they support radically distinct – though complete and entirely correct – theories of value, (3) the prices in the two theories are different both in terms of definitions and values, (4) in Sraffa‘s model it is impossible to define constant returns to scale, while in Arrow-Debreu this property is admissible, and (5) in Arrow-Debreu the interpersonal income distribution is determined whereas in Srafa‘s model the distribution of income between workers and capitalists is undetermined.constant returns to scale, theory of value, relations of production, counterfactual information, prices, exchange values, income distribution, general equilibrium, capital, marginal product