Loading...
For an emancipatory socio-economics
Elson, Diane
Elson, Diane
Author(s)
Elson, Diane
Author(s) (Additional)
Illustrator(s)
Producer(s)
Contributor(s)
Contributor(s) (Other)
Editor(s)
Advisor(s)
Contact(s)
Data Collector(s)
Keywords
Collections
Files
Loading...
elson.pdf
Adobe PDF, 289.69 KB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Online Access
Abstract
"In these brief remarks I would like to take up some of the issues raised by Thandika Mkandawire in his concept note for this workshop. This is not so much a finished paper as a contribution to a dialogue and an exploration of some ideas. Rethinking Economics I would like to take as my starting point the need to rethink all of economics, not only the kind of analysis and policy that is applied to the ensemble of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America that are often labelled developing . The problem is not that neoclassical economics works well for developed countries while not fitting developing countries, but that it does not work well for any country. In rethinking what kind of economics is needed for developing countries, it is important to make links with currents of thought that are also challenging the hegemony of neoclassical economics in developed and transition countries. If neoclassical economics is allowed to appear (even by default) as the appropriate economics for rich and powerful countries, then any reconstituted development economics will continue to be marginalised, both in the policy arena and in the curriculum. There are several currents of thought that contain challenges to the dominance of neoclassical economic thinking- structuralist, post-keynesian, evolutionary economics among them. My remarks draw in particular on two -the human development current and the feminist economics current (see also Elson, 1997; Elson, 1999;Elson and Cagatay, 2000). They reflect a belief in the importance of pluralism in thinking about economies. Unlike the World Bank s World Development Report, the UNDP Human Development Report examines issues of poverty, inequality and growth in all countries. The human development approach challenges the merely instrumental treatment of human beings as factors of production in the service of economic growth no matter where it takes place. Similarly, feminist economics (as exemplified, for instance, in the journal Feminist Economics, and in special issues of World Development on gender, trade, and macroeconomics, Vol 23, No 11, 1995 and Vol 28, No.7, 2000) challenges the validity of rational economic man for rich countries as well as for poor ones;"(pg 2)
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Preprint
Date
2001-09-07
Identifier
ISBN
DOI
Copyright/License
With permission of the license/copyright holder