Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Journal of the History of Economic Thought
  4. Most cited
Journal Home
Refine listing
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Most cited

This page lists all time most cited articles for this title. Please use the publication date filters on the left if you would like to restrict this list to recently published content, for example to articles published in the last three years. The number of times each article was cited is displayed to the right of its title and can be clicked to access a list of all titles this article has been cited by.

Contents

Page 41 of 44

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • THE ORGANIZATIONAL PROPERTIES OF MONEY: GUSTAVO DEL VECCHIO’S THEORY

  • GIANFRANCO TUSSET
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    07 June 2012, pp. 243-260

  • The integration of money into the Walrasian general equilibrium scheme is an age-old and intricate issue. One of the first attempts was made by Gustavo Del Vecchio, who, in the early twentieth century, built a theory of circulation that considered money as a medium of exchange, and investigated its organizational and social aspects in depth. Del Vecchio developed a theory of monetary service grounded on the distinction between individual and social utility of money. Moreover, he stated that money, credit, accumulation, and crisis could no longer be theorized with time omitted, and this induced him to formulate dynamic statements that put forward claims about money as a store of value. The organizational and social dimensions of money, time, and uncertainty were all important and interconnected aspects in Del Vecchio’s scientific inquiry, for they all sprang from his conceptualization of money as a medium of exchange.

  • Cited by 1

  • HIGH LEVELS OF UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE MERCANTILIST ERA

  • John M. Letiche
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    29 April 2014, pp. 237-251

  • This article draws attention to the high levels of unemployment in the mercantilist era, a parallel to conditions in the less developed countries at the present time. Understandably, distinguished economists of the twentieth century, writing before the publication of Keynes’ General Theory, tended to underestimate this problem. Actual causes of the high levels of unemployment are examined, including the fluctuating impacts of merchant entrepreneurs, agricultural revolutions, political unrest, and warfare, as well as nutritional deficiencies, which contributed directly to unemployment.

  • Cited by 1

  • Derailing Value Theory: Adam Smith and the Aristotelian Tradition

  • John C. Winfrey
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 June 2009, pp. 301-319

  • The word VALUE, it is to be observed, has two different meanings, and sometimes expresses the utility of some particular object, and sometimes the power of purchasing other goods which the possession of that object conveys. The one may be called ‘value in use;’ the other, ‘value in exchange.’ The things which have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value in exchange; and, on the contrary, those which have the greatest value in exchange have frequently little or no value in use. Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarce any thing; scarce any thing can be had in exchange for it. A diamond, on the contrary, has scarce any value in use; but a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it (Smith 1776, I, iv, p. 42).

  • Cited by 1

  • Comment on Horwitz's Article

  • Allin Cottrell
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 June 2009, pp. 308-313

  • Austrian economics is arousing increasing interest, not to say enthusiasm, these days. No doubt this is in part due to the collapse of the planned economies of the Soviet type, which has lent credibility to the claims of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek regarding the impossibility of rational economic calculation under socialism-claims which were disputed by the mainstream neoclassical economists of a generation ago. The phenomenon also reflects a relatively long-standing dissatisfaction with neoclassical economics. For many years it was the radical critics of capitalism who felt most keenly the attractions of alternative approaches in economics. Now, increasingly, champions of the market are coming to believe that neoclassical theory does not offer a deep and firm enough basis for asserting the virtues of the market system, and the counterproductive effects of government intervention therein.

  • Cited by 1

  • SMITH AT 300: A VIOLENT FIT OF LAZINESS

  • Sarah Skwire
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    01 March 2023, pp. 182-183

  • The works of Adam Smith are filled with quotable moments. The pin factory. The poor man’s son. The invisible hand. The butcher, the brewer, and the baker. The dog and the philosopher. The impartial spectator. The man of system and his chessboard. And our propensity to truck, barter, and exchange. All of these are so well known and so often quoted that I’ve had editors ask me just to refer to them in passing rather than quoting them in full.

  • Cited by 1

  • Is Capitalist Globalization Inevitable in the Marxian Paradigm?

  • Miguel D. Ramírez
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    04 March 2014, pp. 83-95

  • This paper examines Marx’s views on capitalist globalization and its supposed inevitability, and contends that they underwent a substantial evolution and revision after the publication of the Communist Manifesto. In the case of China, a prime example of the Asiatic mode of production, Marx even doubted whether globalization (capitalism) would ever be able to accomplish its historical mission of developing the forces of production and creating the material conditions for a higher mode of production, viz., communism. In the Russian case, he seriously entertained the notion that it could bypass the hardships and vicissitudes of capitalism and forge its own unique path to socialism. If accepted, this interpretation represents a serious challenge to the universality and validity of Marx’s materialist conception of history.

  • Cited by 1

  • PAUL SAKMANN’S AND ALBERT SCHATZ’S MANDEVILLE STUDIES: THEIR LINK TO HAYEK’S ‘SPONTANEOUS ORDER’ THEORY

  • Mark Charles Nolan
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    18 November 2016, pp. 485-506

  • This paper agrees with Friedrich August Hayek’s assertion in his 1945 Dublin lecture that the importance of Dutch physician Bernard Mandeville’s role in the history of economics had been overlooked and with his 1966 London lecture’s assertion that Mandeville’s important contribution qualified him as a master mind. Paul Sakmann’s and Albert Schatz’s studies of Mandeville’s eighteenth-century allegorical Fable of the Bees satire were acknowledged by Hayek as having influenced his formulation and development of the theory of spontaneous order extended from Scottish Enlightenment thinkers. Each of these two writers’ contribution to Mandeville and spontaneous order theory is considered as well as proposing a new source for the term “spontaneous order”—Schatz’s 1907‘le principe d’ordre spontané.’

  • Cited by 1

  • A. G. PAPANDREOU’S ACADEMIC ECONOMIC THOUGHT 1943–1963

  • Michel S. Zouboulakis
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 March 2023, pp. 486-502
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • The aim of this article is to make an overall assessment of Andreas George Papandreou’s theoretical contributions during his American academic career, from the perspective of the history of economic thought. Papandreou contributed to the postwar development of economic thought in competition theory and experimental testing of consumer theory. In developing competition theory, he introduced a new method of evaluating the monopolistic power of a firm through a coefficient measuring the firm’s penetration in the market. Furthermore, he suggested a way of experimentally testing whether individual preferences satisfy the axiom of transitivity. He actively participated in the methodological controversies on the realisticness of economic assumptions that took place between 1946 and 1953, and on the empirical meaning of economics in 1963, between Milton Friedman, Paul Samuelson, Fritz Machlup, Herbert Simon, and others.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • FERDINANDO GALIANI’S NEWTONIAN SOCIAL MATHEMATICS – CORRIGENDUM

  • Rosario Patalano
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    09 September 2020, p. 455
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Secondary Gains from Professionalization: A French Tale

  • Robert F. Hebert
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 June 2009, pp. 133-142

  • From this same rostrum several years ago, outgoing president Bill Barber (1990, p. 110) said that presidential addresses tend to fall into one of two broad categories. Category I speeches typically survey the state of the art, identify promising directions for future research, and attempt to justify our scholarly existence to skeptics who doubt the value of studying the world of dead economists. Category II speeches draw their form and substance from the speaker's particular research interests.

  • Cited by 1

  • H. J. Davenport's Loan Fund Theory of Capital

  • J. Patrick Gunning
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 June 2009, pp. 349-369

  • The loan fund theory of capital was developed by the unheralded American economist, Herbert J. Davenport (1861-1931). Davenport's name has virtually disappeared from writings on the history of economic thought. Today, he seems best known as a teacher of Frank Knight at Cornell around 1915. Davenport wrote three major books during an 18-year period between 1896 and 1914. The first (1896) was a treatise based on what he called the “principle of sacrifice,” or subjective opportunity cost. His second book, Value and Distribution (1908), covered much of the same ground but also presented some original contributions. It marked his emergence as a professional economist, since he presented his ideas within the context of an appraisal of classical and neoclassical economic doctrine. Among other things, the book contained a penetrating, subjectivist critique of four ideas in the history of subjectivist economics: marginal utility, Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk's theory of capital, Friedrich Wieser's theory of cost, and Frank Fetter's theory of market interest. It also introduced the loan fund theory of capital, which is the topic of this paper.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

Page 41 of 44