WHITHER DEVELOPMENT. ECONOMICS? James H. Weaver and Kevin M. O'Keefe L·development economics enters its fourth decade as both a field of study and a theoretical launching pad for development assistance policies, it is appropriate to ask some hard questions: 1) Is development economics a legitimate field in its own right? 2) What have been the results of the return to orthodoxy in the 1980s? 3) What is the current state of development economics? and finally, 4) What is the future of development economics? Using these four questions to structure the paper we will attempt to present a critical review of development economics since its inception and to suggest a vision of the key elements likely to be addressed by development economics in the future. A Brief Overview OfDevelopment Economics Development economics has been characterized by its rejection ofthe relevance of classical economic theory and laissez-faire, free trade policy for developing countries. This rejection was based on: the disastrous experience, during the Great Depression, of capitalist countries following laissez-faire policies; the impressive rate of industrialization achieved by James H. Weaver is a professor of economics at the American University and is principal investigator ofthe Development Studies Program ofthe U.S. Agency for International Development. Kevin M. O'Keefe is a graduate student in the American University's School ofInternational Service International Development Program and a research fellow at the Development Studies Program. 113 114 SAISREVIEW the Soviet Union using centralized planning; and the conviction that the institutions necessary for market economies to operate were not present in developing countries. In this early period, development economists equated development with industrialization and virtually ignored agricultural transformation. Convinced that laissez-faire and free trade would not produce development, they argued for increased government planning, a large role for government saving and investment, protection of domestic industry, and greater foreign assistance. Not all orthodox economists accepted the arguments of development economists. Many kept believing in the relevance ofneo-classical economics and the laissez-faire, free trade strategy. Moreover, in addition to the orthodox development economists, there were many non-orthodox economists studying development during this same period. Two schools of non-orthodox economists emerged: dependency theorists and neo— Marxists. Dependency theorists agreed with the critiques made by the orthodox development economists but went further. They argued that successful capitalist development was impossible in developing countries because these countries were so dependent on industrialized countries for technology and capital. Dependency theorists clearly had a more highly developed theory of underdevelopment and its causes than of development . Although the policy prescriptions of this group were diverse, they often called for a de-linking from the international economic system, socialist revolution, or both. In the 1970s a new group on the left, classified as neo-Marxists, rejected dependency theory entirely. They argued that imperialism was a progressive force in developing countries and that the problem was not too much capitalism but too little. According to this school, the main obstacles to development were the same forces that had blocked capitalist development in Asia in the fifteenth century when it was beginning in Europe. These neo-Marxists pointed to the great progress made by Korea, Brazil, and others, in industrializing as proof that successful capitalist development was quite possible; and they concluded that only when pre-capitalist elements, such as feudal land tenure, have been eliminated and the productive forces ofsociety released through capitalism will it be possible to achieve a successful transition to socialism. An Overview of Three Key Development Strategies What practical strategies have arisen from the study ofdevelopment economics? We shall discuss three such strategies: import substitution industrialization, export promotion, and growth with equity. WHITHER DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS? 115 Import Substitution Industrialization (ISI). In the 1950s, development economists proposed a strategy for rapid industrialization based on domestic production of consumer goods. This approach advocated the imposition of quotas and tariffs to keep foreign goods out and to protect infant industries. It also recommended the maintenance of overvalued or multiple exchange rates in order to encourage the importation ofcapital, intermediate goods, and raw materials, while discouraging the importation of luxury and consumer goods. Governments were advised to control and allocate foreign exchange to crucial...

Taken together, Tony Lawson’s Economics & Reality1 and Steve Fleetwood’s edited Critical Realism in Economics: Development and Debate 2 played a large part in defining the project critical realism in economics, which also delineates a particular identity within the project of critical realism in general. The defining features of critical realism in economics are a general ontological critique of mainstream economics for its deductive method, formalism, and closed systems modelling and also a broad constructive (and generally nonpartisan) approach to key heterodox traditions, focused on thinkers such as Veblen, Hayek, Marx and Keynes. Critical realism in economics is significantly different from, firstly, critical realists engaged in other areas of social study such as sociology and, secondly, critical realists that focus on one ‘economist’ and line of thought in particular such as Marx and Marxism. Both these two other strands of critical realism can be seen as other projects within critical realism that share a number of arguments, tenets and insights with critical realism in economics but differ in emphasis, research interests and identity. Two important books were published within critical realism in economics in 2003. The first one was Tony Lawson’s Reorienting Economics 3 and the second one was Paul Downward’s edited Applied Economics and the Critical Realist Critique. The purpose of this review essay is to discuss the latter book in the context of critical realism in economics and its recent development where the former book is a major sign post.4 Tony Lawson’s recent Reorienting

Home economists believe that amidst today’s challenges to human wellness home economics has great potential to ameliorate the situation. Evidences albeit sporadic, are found for potential of home economics to contribute to human wellness. Experts realize the need for kind of education that home economics has been providing since more than a century. However recognition of home economics itself as the kind of education needed today is still rare. This paper reviewed the reports and evidences of relevant situations and tried to explore the actions needed for realization of potential of home economics to contribute to human wellness. It emerges that philosophical reviews indicating potential of home economics are relatively easier to find than empirical studies verifying contribution of home economics education to human wellness. Large scale trials or systematic reviews providing robust evidence for potential of home economics probably have never been conducted. Various strategies including conduction of such trials are given for unveiling home economics.

Lectures on Urban Economics offers a rigorous but nontechnical treatment of major topics in urban economics. To make the book accessible to a broad range of readers, the analysis is diagrammatic rather than mathematical. Although nontechnical, the book relies on rigorous economic reasoning. In contrast to the cursory theoretical development often found in other textbooks, Lectures on Urban Economics offers thorough and exhaustive treatments of models relevant to each topic, with the goal of revealing the logic of economic reasoning while also teaching urban economics. Topics covered include reasons for the existence of cities, urban spatial structure, urban sprawl and land-use controls, freeway congestion, housing demand and tenure choice, housing policies, local public goods and services, pollution, crime, and quality of life. Footnotes throughout the book point to relevant exercises, which appear at the back of the book. These 22 extended exercises (containing 125 individual parts) develop numerical examples based on the models analyzed in the chapters. Lectures on Urban Economics is suitable for undergraduate use, as background reading for graduate students, or as a professional reference for economists and scholars interested in the urban economics perspective.

PART I PUBLIC SECTOR PRODUCTION 2. Shadow Pricing in the Public Sector (Peter Hammond Professor of Economics, Stanford University) 3. Regulation of Public Utilities and Nationalized Industries (Ingo Vogelsang Professor of Economics, Boston University) 4. Economics of Publicly Provided Goods and Services (Paul Hare Professor of Economics, Heriot Watt University) PART II DISTRIBUTION AND WELFARE 5. The Political Economy of Fiscal Policy (Daniel Ingberman and Robert Inman respectively Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Management, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania and Professor of Finance, Economics and Public Management, University of Pennsylvania) 6. Policy Targetting in a New Welfare Framework with Poverty (John Beath, Geoff Lewis and David Ulph both John Beath and Geoff Lewis are Lecturers in Economics, Bristol University David Ulph is Professor of Economics, Bristol University) 7. The Structure of Income and Commodity Taxation (Christopher Heady Lecturer in Economics, University College, London) PART III ESTIMATION AND COMPUTATION 8. Econometric Issues in Public Sector Economics (Richard Blundell Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies) 9. General Equilibrium Computation Applied to Public Sector Issues (John Piggot Professor of Economics, University of Sydney with Appendix by Jon Fuller)

Journal Article International Political Economics Get access International Political Economics. By BRUNO S. FREY. (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1984. Pp. viii+183. £17.50 hardback.) Paul Mosley Paul Mosley University of Bath Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Economic Journal, Volume 95, Issue 378, 1 June 1985, Pages 507–508, https://doi.org/10.2307/2233237 Published: 01 June 1985

Journal Article Communist International Economics Get access Communist International Economics. By P. J. D. Wiles. Oxford: Blackwell. 1969. 566 pp. Index. 84s. Alfred Zauberman Alfred Zauberman Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar International Affairs, Volume 46, Issue 4, October 1970, Pages 770–771, https://doi.org/10.2307/2614559 Published: 01 October 1970

Journal Article Sukhamoy Chakravarty on Marxist economics and contemporary developing economics: some comments Get access Terence J. Byres Terence J. Byres *Department of Economic and Political Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. These comments were prepared for a seminar following the lecture given in memory of Suzy Paine in Cambridge on 31 October 1986. See Chakravarty (1987). Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Cambridge Journal of Economics, Volume 11, Issue 2, June 1987, Pages 173–178, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035022 Published: 01 June 1987

The third approach is somewhat more eclectic, but could be described as economics with a focus on building and construction. Runeson (2000) does not define building economics (the title of his book) but explains at length the characteristics of economics as a science and the methodological implications of that, a theme investigated further in his chapter in this book. The books by Gruneberg and Ive (2000, and Ive and Gruneberg 2000) also do not neatly fall into one of the two categories above, and offer an alternative approach. Many of the other books on the economics of construction (e.g. Briscoe 1988; Ball 1988, 2006; Finkel 1997) or the economics of the built environment (Warren 1993) do not define CE at all. Although this is a small sample of the field it is representative, and shows why Ofori (1994) could confidently claim then that no definition had been accepted for CE, a situation that still exists today.

Over the past several decades, researchers have used economics to understand a number of issues in education policy. This article argues that some education researchers have defined economics too narrowly, neglecting several areas of economics research that cut across disciplinary boundaries. One subdiscipline of economics that might be of use in education, but which has not been applied much to it, is behavioral economics, which incorporates psychological knowledge about human behavior to enhance and extend economic models of decision making. This article reviews some of the behavioral concepts in economics that are most likely to inform education research and policy—prospect theory, framing effects, status quo bias, paradox of choice, and intrinsic motivation—and suggests directions for further research.