Long run input use-input price relations and the cost function Hessian

By definition, to compare alternative long run equilibria is to compare alternative points on the real input price frontier. It follows at once that one can never move between long run equilibria by changing just one input price; one must change at least two. And in some cases, indeed, such as the Wicksellian one, to change one price is ipso facto to change all the others in a determinate manner. Hence the Hessian of the cost function can – quite obviously – never represent the long run comparative statics of input price-input quantity relations with accuracy. More detailed investigation in fact shows the Hessian to be a hopeless guide to [dli/dwj], both qualitatively and quantitatively

The industry supply curve: two different traditions

This paper seeks to provide some new insights into the precise nature and the analytical foundations (or lack of them) of the familiar industry supply curve. To this end, we reconsider some fundamental phases of its historical evolution. Two different traditions are distinguished: one consists of the formalisations of Marshall’s theory proposed by Barone and, later, by Pigou, Viner, Harrod and Robinson; the other consists of the models of Hicks and Allen, on the basis of ideas and criticism put forward by other LSE scholars, like Kaldor and Robbins, in the mid-1930s. It is argued that the second tradition did not really remedy the weak aspects of the Marshallian theory of supply

A Note about the Interest Rate and the Revenue Function

Economic systems with a positive, uniform, and constant interest rate have been widely studied. It is shown that, in such systems, the presence of produced inputs undermines some standard results concerning the revenue function. The partial derivative, with respect to a product price, is not always equal to the net output of the product and the generalized positive supply response is not always valid. P. A. Samuelson's reciprocity conditions are also upset.

The practices of happiness: political economy, religion and wellbeing

There is growing evidence that rising levels of prosperity in Western economies since 1945 have not been matched by greater incidences of reported well-being and happiness. Indeed, material affluence is often accompanied instead by greater social and individual distress. A growing literature within the humanities and social sciences is increasingly concerned to chart not only the underlying trends in recorded levels of happiness, but to consider what factors, if any, contribute to positive and sustainable experiences of well-being and quality of life. Increasingly, such research is focusing on the importance of values and beliefs in human satisfaction or quality of life; but the specific contribution of religion to these trends is relatively under-examined. This unique collection of essays seeks to rectify that omission, by identifying the nature and role of the religious contribution to wellbeing. A unique collection of nineteen leading scholars from the field of economics, psychology, public theology and social policy have been brought together in this volume to explore the religious contribution to the debate about happiness and well-being. These essays explore the religious dimensions to a number of key features of well-being, including marriage, crime and rehabilitation, work, inequality, mental health, environment, participation, institutional theory, business and trade. They engage particularly closely with current trends in economics in identifying alternative models of economic growth which focus on its qualitative as well as quantitative dimensions. This distinctive volume brings to public notice the nature and role of religion’s contribution to wellbeing, including new ways of measurement and evaluation. As such, it represents a valuable and unprecedented resource for the development of a broad-based religious contribution to the field. It will be of particular relevance for those who are concerned about the continuing debate about personal and societal well-being, as well as those who are interested in the continuing significance of religion for the future of public policy

The Causal Effects of Income Support and Housing Benefits on Mental Well-Being: An Application of a Bayesian Network

© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This study explores the causal effects of air pollution, income support, housing benefits and household income on the subjective mental well-being in United Kingdom (UK). Additionally, the analysis considers the effects of air pollution and weather conditions. The estimates are based on data from the British Household Panel Survey. The results show that those who are unemployed or who have a low income and who claim the benefits report higher levels of mental well-being than those who do not claim them. Moreover, the marginal willingness to pay (MWTP) for an improvement on air quality are lower in the case of the Bayesian Network

Social surplus approach and heterodox economics

Given the emphasis on social provisioning in heterodox economics, two of its central theoretical organizing principles are the concepts of the total social product and the social surplus. This appears to link heterodox economics to the social surplus approach associated with the classical economists and currently with Sraffian economists. However, heterodox economics connects agency with the social surplus and the social product, which the Sraffians reject as they take the level and composition of the social product as given. Therefore the different theoretical approach regarding the social surplus taken in heterodox economics may generate a different but similar way of theorizing about a capitalist economy. To explore this difference is the aim of the paper. Thus the paper is divided into four parts and a conclusion. In the first section social provisioning and the social surplus is introduced. In the second section, the Sraffian social surplus approach is delineated while in the third section the heterodox social surplus approach is delineated. In the fourth section of the paper, some of the implications emerging from the differences between the two approaches are discussed. The paper is concluded in the final section