RETHINK
ECONOMICS
RETHINK
ECONOMICS
... and receive personalised notifications on
new pluralistic content directly into your inbox!

Pragmatic Pluralism

Sam de Muijnck and Joris Tieleman
Economy Studies, 2021
Level: beginner
Perspective: Other
Topic: Business & Firm, Globalization & International Economic Relations, Institutions, Governments & Policy, Labour & Care, Microeconomics & Markets, Reflection of Economics, Resources, Environment & Climate
Format: Foundational Text

Key insights and ideas for thirteen core topics in economics, organised by selecting the most relevant theoretical approaches per topic and contrasting them with each other.


The following chapter is part of the book 'Economy Studies - A guide to rethinking Economics Education'.  It has been published by the Centre for Economy Studies that works on improving and modernising economics education to ensure that students will be better prepared for their future careers and the societal challenges we face today and in the coming decades.

Economy Studies A guide to rethinking Economics Education 

Introduction

This chapter provides a map through the complex jungle of economic theories. There are many different theoretical approaches, and each aspect of the economy has been analysed by a number of different ones. However, it is neither feasible nor productive for students to engage with every possible angle for every topic. Hence, this chapter, together with Building Block 8: Economic Theories, sets out an alternative approach: pragmatic pluralism. That is, make a selection of the most relevant theoretical approaches for the topic that is taught.

While the building block chapter set out the general approach, in this chapter we instead focus on the content, applying the pragmatic pluralism approach to thirteen core topics in economics.

To reiterate, the core logic of this approach to teaching economic theory is that whilst pluralism is an essential aspect of academia, we also need to be pragmatic to successfully apply it in practice. Rather than pursuing the extreme of either only focusing on one approach, or including every possible strand of thought for every topic, we propose a pragmatic middle ground: teaching a select number of approaches for each topic. In this way, it is possible to introduce students to the variety and diversity of economic thinking, whilst still having enough time and space to properly discuss each of the insights in detail with them.

“Reasonable people may have different theories of the way the economy works − different pictures in their heads of what connects one thing with another in the economic system.”

Robert Solow (1983, p. 67)

Theory is the beating heart of all social sciences, including economics. It allows one to understand the components, processes and causal mechanisms characterising various social phenomena in a more structured and systematic manner. However, every topic can be understood from various theoretical perspectives, which can both complement and contradict each other.

Most contemporary economics programmes focus almost exclusively on neoclassical theory. In opposition, some other programmes choose to focus entirely on another perspective. We believe, in contrast to both, that there is no single ‘correct’ or ‘best’ way to understand the economy as a whole. It is too large and complex to be captured by a single point of view.

Hence, we propose a fundamentally pluralist approach to teaching theory. It is essential to teach students a variety of approaches to give them a rich and broad understanding of the topic, the debate around it and learn to think critically and not to take things as absolute truths. Approaches should be judged on their merits, topic by topic: thinking critically and reflectively to decide which theoretical points of departure help us best to understand this particular corner of the economic system.

Including this pluralist discussion is crucial for the development of students’ vital critical thinking skills, through the investigation of links and contradictions between the insights learnt. For a pluralist economics education to be truly valuable, students must graduate not just with strong knowledge of a range of perspectives and methods, but also with a critical understanding of the limitations and blind spots of those tools. Without this, they will struggle to select the most relevant approaches to the task at hand, and to judge how much confidence to have in the conclusions that they reach. Active discussion also has the additional benefit of making sure that students are genuinely understanding the content taught to them, rather than just temporarily memorising it for an exam.

Pragmatic pluralism in practice

So how does this approach work when applied to a topic?

Each topic is subject to debate between alternative views. To make students familiar with these competing theories, for every topic the two main opposing perspectives are selected. However, not all differing ideas and theories are necessarily in conflict with each other. There are also approaches which can supplement one, or both, of the main opposing perspectives, contributing to a richer understanding of the topic. Therefore, each topic also contains one main complementary perspective. On top of these three main theoretical approaches, there are many other useful ideas that students could benefit from by learning about. For this reason, we provide a short summary of other useful insights and ideas that could be included for each topic. In addition, we suggest a few particularly useful teaching materials. In the online version, we provide longer lists of suggestions.

The topics presented below could be, and often already are, taught in individual courses. They can also be combined, especially when there is significant overlap as is the case for the topics of Finance and Money for example, although this does of course shorten the teaching time that can be devoted to each topic and its insights. As to determining the relative teaching time to the various perspectives, the following rule of thumb could be useful: devote the first half of the course to the two main opposing approaches, the third quarter to the complementary perspective and the last quarter to the other useful insights. As with every rule of thumb, the specific case and context should be considered and we advise teachers to determine the relative teaching time devoted to each insight taking the local situation into account.

Cautionary notes

Before we go into the specific ideas and insights, we want to provide a short recap of the cautionary notes, which are described in full in Building Block 8: Economic Theories.

Firstly, the following overview should be viewed as only one possible example of a pragmatic pluralist approach to teaching economic theory. An overview such as this one should never be set in stone, as the discipline itself is also constantly evolving. While some approaches, such as complexity economics, currently have relatively few insights listed in the overview, this might change over the coming years as more scholars will further develop this approach and apply it to different topics.

Secondly, the overview could easily be expanded to allow for more detail and nuance or a wider range of perspectives or topics. The examples have been written to suit the time constraints of an individual course. The framework could be adapted for a relatively brief programme, such as an economics major in a liberal arts programme, by selecting fewer perspectives for each topic and including fewer topics and possibly combining them into courses. Equally, if the available teaching time is greater, for example with a theory-oriented four-year undergraduate economics programme, more topics, insights and a greater range of perspectives could be included.

Thirdly, our economics education and own reading have shaped the topics and perspectives that are presented below. This is greatly influenced by living and studying in the Netherlands, and Europe more broadly, and the strong bias in the discipline as a whole towards economic thinking from the Global North. We strongly believe that economics curricula need to be decolonised and with this book we try to contribute to this. To help us do so, we have asked students and professors from all over the world, as well as organisations active on this issue, such as Diversifying and Decolonising Economics, for advice. Nevertheless, it is important to say that this is not an area that we personally have particularly strong knowledge of and feel that more could, and should, be done in this regard. We therefore welcome all suggestions on how the content in this chapter, and the rest of the book, could be enriched and improved by including other topics, perspectives and insights.

Finally, this technique of putting approaches as well as topics in separate boxes is only a heuristic for identifying the most important ideas and insights to teach. Many of these approaches and topics are strongly interlinked and can be difficult, or even impossible, to truly separate from each other. As a result, individual thinkers and their ideas can be difficult to put into a single box. For instance, Joseph Schumpeter built on classical, historical, Marxian, Austrian and neoclassical ideas, and is often seen as a key inspiration for evolutionary economics, which is therefore also sometimes called Schumpeterian economics. It is important that students learn about these links and become familiar with how both the ideas and the topics are connected.

With these cautionary notes in mind, we hope this overview can be of some help in putting the pragmatic pluralist approach in practice and adapting economic theory courses.

Overview of the pragmatist pluralist approach

Below we have put the thirteen economic topics (along the top) and sixteen theoretical perspectives (down the side) in a table to give an overview of how our pragmatic pluralist approach works.

It would be possible to fill in every box (representing a combination between a topic and an approach) to create what could be described as ‘indiscriminate’ pluralism. We think that for research purposes, such an approach could be very useful as it could generate new insights by utilising approaches previously not applied to a topic. However, for education we would not advise such an approach, as it would be impossible to teach every possible perspective on a given topic in a meaningful way, given the limited teaching time available.

Instead, we advise teachers to focus on the main insights into their chosen topic. In other words, when teaching an economics course, they should focus on the combinations of the topic and perspectives that are most important. For every topic, we have noted to the two main opposing perspectives with ■, the main complementary perspective with □, and the perspectives that can provide smaller but still valuable additional insights with +. In this way, many boxes stay empty. This does not mean that the perspective has nothing to say on the topic. However, economics education requires us to make choices as to what to teach and what not. In this overview, below we have presented an attempt at making such choices, asking which insights help us understand the world the most. Sometimes there are cases in which perspectives share a certain insight. This is discussed in the explanations of the insights, but for brevity each insight is attributed to a single perspective in the table.

Core theoretical approaches on 13 topics

Economy Studies provides detailed guides to the pragmatist pluralist approach for the following 13 topics. A guide explaining how pragmatic pluralism can be applied to teaching about inequality can be found below.

  1. Governments
  2. Business Cycles
  3. Consumption
  4. Economic Development
  5. Finance
  6. Firms
  7. Households
  8. Inequality
  9. International Trade
  10. Labour
  11. Markets
  12. Money
  13. Nature

Example for Pragmatic Pluralism: Inequality

Inequality is a hotly debated topic both within economics as well as outside of it in other academic disciplines, in politics and in society at large. As such, there are also many dimensions and aspects of inequality to which various thinkers and activists have drawn attention to, from economic inequality based on class to gender and ethnicity, or race. Another key question is: inequality in what? Market or disposable income, wealth, power, influence, opportunities, happiness or health, to just name a few. A key question in the field is whether people are fairly rewarded for their work, or whether power differences prevent equitable remuneration. In short, whether market inequalities are fair or not. Another core question in the field is how different forms of inequality relate and interact with each other. Whether being a black woman, for example, is simply about adding up the effects of being black and female, or whether combinations have their own unique characteristics?


Main opposing perspectives

■ Marxian political economy: Exploitation

■ Neoclassical economics: You get what you deserve


Main complementary perspective

□ Feminist economics: Intersectionality is crucial to understand inequalities


Additional perspectives and insights

+ Post-Keynesian economics: Equity generally promotes efficiency

+ Austrian school: Social justice is a nonsensical idea

+ Other: Merit-driven inequality is socially undesirable

+ Behavioural economics: Inequality is relative, and mostly disliked

+ Complexity economics: Marx was right – there are two classes

+ Other: Piketty’s r>g


Main opposing perspectives: Marxian political economy and neoclassical economics

A core debate about market inequality is whether it should be understood as being fair and meritocratic, or not. The former argue that individuals, at least in a capitalist, or market, economy, freely make deals with each other to make their lives better and in doing so are rewarded for their personal performance and successes. Others, however, argue capitalism is an unjust system in which hierarchical power relations force some to work for others, resulting in their exploitation. In sum, the argument is about whether capitalism is a system in which ‘the pie’ is fairly and widely shared, or whether it is a system that creates unparalleled wealth next to desperate poverty.

Marxian political economy: Building on earlier ideas, in particular classical political economy, Marxian scholars look at societies as being made up by socio-economic classes: “In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebeians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations” (Marx & Engels, 1848, p. 2). In industrial capitalism, two classes are key: the capitalists, who own the means of production, and the workers, who have to sell their labour in order to make a living. And within these broad categories, one could also add more differentiation. Examples of old categories are the ‘haute bourgeoisie’, referring to bankers and industrialists, and the ‘petite bourgeoisie’, associated with small businessmen and white-collar workers. And a more recent example is the ‘precariat’, which is characterized by precariousness due to job insecurity, identity insecurity, and a lack of control over one’s own time because of workfare policies.

The core argument is that while workers seem to be free and engaging in voluntary transactions to benefit themselves under capitalism, they are not. Workers’ labour is not truly voluntary as they do not have the means of production and thus are forced to sell their labour to capitalists, who do own the means of production, or else live in poverty and starve. These fundamentally unequal bargaining positions between employees and employers allow the latter to exploit the former, by appropriating part of the value employees produce. For the functioning of this capitalist system, it is crucial that the state and the law enforce the existing unequal distribution of private property. In Marxian thought, politics and the economy should therefore be seen as inherently intertwined, rather than as separate and unrelated social domains.

Among those who view market inequalities as unfair, there is a broad range of opinions on what should be done about it. These range from those who argue for redistributing income and social welfare programs to prevent extreme poverty, to those who advocate changing the economic structures that give rise to such unfair market inequalities in the first place, sometimes called predistribution. 

Neoclassical economics: During the late 19th century, the young neoclassical approach tried to counter Marxian, institutionalist and other ideas which argued that capitalism is an unfair system in which workers are exploited. John Bates Clark in The Distribution of Wealth, for example, took it upon himself to prove scientifically that the market inequalities were justified and fair, rather than excessive and unjust. Clark argued that the market rewards the factors of production, including both capital and labour, equally to what they contribute to the production process, more precisely the market value of their marginal product. In other words, everyone gets their fair share based on their productivity.

To understand inequalities, one thus has to look at differences in talents and education, as these make people more or less productive. It can also be that the context changes and the market demand for certain types of skills has increased or decreased. To explain the rise in income inequality of the last decades, for example, neoclassical economists have argued that technological change has favoured higher educated workers relative to lower educated workers, also known as skill-biased technological change (SBTC). 

Neoclassical economists have theorized that competitive markets would cause discrimination to disappear in the long run, as those who discriminate hurt themselves economically by forgoing the best market deals. Becker theorized that people could have a ‘taste’, or preference, for discrimination and are therefore willing to pay more for their ‘preferred’ groups than for discriminated groups. Another hypothesis is that discrimination is rational and non-biased market behavior as people have limited information and thus utilize all indicators they observe, even if they are imperfect. This theory of statistical discrimination argues it is too expensive, and often impossible, to treat everyone as an individual. As a result, people rely on statistics about groups to judge individuals. It should be noted that a key and controversial assumption in this approach is that discriminated groups are on average less productive and therefore generally treated as such, even though there are individual exceptions. In this way, statistical discrimination is thus an efficient way of dealing with information costs.

Main complementary perspective: Feminist economics

A key insight of feminist scholars that has come to prominence in the late 20th century is that different forms of social and economic inequality intersect with each other and in doing so create unique combinations. This concept of ‘intersectionality’ was initially developed to better understand how it could be that the issues of black women in the US were more neglected than what one would expect if one would simply add the gender and race factors. The feminist movement was largely dominated by white middle-class women and the civil rights movement, despite crucially relying on many leading black women, was spearheaded by male black leaders. As such, the idea came up that one should directly look at combinations of factors, the intersectionalities, rather than putting gender, race or class first.

In this perspective, inequalities are understood as overlapping systems of power with social identities that can be oppressing as well as empowering. A key related idea is that one’s personal experiences and social position, one’s ‘standpoint’, shape how one looks at and understands the world. According to this standpoint theory, social identities based on race, gender or class play an important role, but do not explain everything in an essentialist way as individual experiences can differ between people of the same social category. Nevertheless, it is argued that marginalized groups are in an unique position to enrich and improve our understanding of the economy because their perspectives and experiences have been underrepresented in economics. When one teaches or researches a topic, it thus is important to be aware of one’s social position and acknowledge that others, and especially those with different standpoints, might observe different aspects of the topic at hand.

Additional perspectives and insights

Post-Keynesian economics: Post-Keynesian economists have drawn attention to the macroeconomic effects of inequality. Poorer people spend a greater proportion of their income than rich people do, in jargon they have a higher propensities to consume. Because of this, growing inequality can be bad for growth as it can lead to a fall in consumer demand, which can only temporarily be prevented by expanding private borrowing. This chain of reasoning as well as various empirical studies have led numerous economists to argue that equity and efficiency can go together and strengthen each other. This is in contrast to the idea, prevalent among neoclassical and Austrian thinkers, that there generally is a trade-off between equity and efficiency, especially when it comes to government intervention in the private sector. 

The different understandings of the economy lead to different policy conclusions. Marxian political economy is associated with overthrowing capitalism and eliminating class inequality all together, while (post-)Keynesian economics is often linked to the idea of saving capitalism with state intervention and redistribution to lessening inequality. Advocates of redistribution argue that it not only leads to fairer distributions of wealth and income, but that it also stimulates the economy by increasing demand. Furthermore, they argue redistribution is efficient because it reduces the social costs associated with high economic inequality, such as increasing physical and mental illnesses, social fracturing and polarization, increasing crime and drug abuse, increasing gambling and advertising expenditures, and decreasing educational performances and child development (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009). Opponents of redistribution argue the government should focus its efforts on securing competition and free markets as these will ensure market outcomes are fair and efficient. Furthermore, they argue that inequality motivates people to behave productively and efficiently, as they see that economic success is rewarded with wealth. Finally, there are also neoclassical economists who argue that efficiency and distribution are entirely unrelated to each other, often referring to the second theorem of welfare economics which says that any distribution can theoretically come to an efficient (Pareto optimal) outcome.

Austrian schoolFew argue against equality of opportunity, but various Austrian theorists, such as Friedrich Hayek in The Mirage of Social Justice, do. Hayek argued that market outcomes to a large extent depend on random factors and luck, and people their rewards can thus not be attributed to individual’s performances, as neoclassical economists do. Nevertheless, he argues it is wrong to call market outcomes unjust, as he asserts that ascribing moral judgments to societal systems is mistaken and even ‘primitive’. Modern capitalist societies are characterized by a diversity of values, so the focus should be on protecting people’s (market) freedom and (property) rights so that the (free) market can make everyone better off. The whole idea of social justice, in this perspective, is a ‘mirage’ and should be abandoned. If the government would try to ensure equality of opportunity, it would distort the otherwise efficient market allocation of resources and thereby leaving everyone, including the poor and disadvantaged, worse off than if the market would be left alone. Capitalism should thus be defended by emphasising its efficiency and not by claiming it to be, or trying to make it, a meritocracy, in which individual talents and effort rather than birth, determine success.

Other: This line of reasoning is in stark contrast to other critics of meritocracy, who argue that (large) inequalities of outcome are not desirable even if equality of opportunity would be ensured. Micheal Sandel in The Tyranny of Merit, for example, argues that meritocracy undermines social cohesion and causes social polarization. He criticizes the misuse of meritocracy to justify unequal outcomes by wrongly claiming people had equal chances. Educational outcomes, for example, are often used to claim vastly unequal outcomes are meritocratic and therefore just, despite the fact that a vast literature of research shows how educational outcomes are heavily dependent on socio-economic contextual factors and are thus not simply a reflection of individual merit. But Sandel’s more fundamental point is that the ideal of meritocracy is flawed itself. Meritocracy, or just the idea of it, leads to a demoralising individualism in which the ‘successful’ develop hubris, believing their affluence is the result of their virtue, and the ‘losers’ are humiliated by making them believe their failure is their own fault. Rather than aiming for a (very) unequal society with social mobility based on merit, he argues we should strive towards a society in which everyone can have a good life and a recognized and respected role in contributing to the common good. According to Sandel, the corona crisis could set us in the right direction as it made us realize the social value of many low paying jobs which were deemed ‘essential’, from nurses and childcare workers to delivery workers and grocery store clerks. 

Behavioural economics: Experimental studies consistently find that human beings are reciprocal in their behavior and have inequality aversion, sometimes referred to as social preferences. Most people favour ‘fair’ outcomes, even when it costs themselves something. Interestingly, research also finds that for people’s happiness it is especially their income relative to their sociological reference group(s), rather than just its absolute level, that matters. Also in contrast to neoclassical theory, behavioural economists found that increased income only makes people happier up until one point, after which more income contributes very little, if anything at all, to one’s happiness. Being poor, on the other hand, is found to have damaging effects on people’s cognitive capabilities. Poverty consumes people’s mental resources as they have to develop short-term survival strategies to cope with a hostile and stressful environment. This also helps explain why poor people, especially those who grew up as children in poverty, have higher risks of mental and physical illnesses and have more difficulty with long-term orientation and healthy behavior.

Complexity economics: Various economists and physicists, under the banner of complexity economics and econophysics, have applied methods from physics to study inequality. Trying to best describe empirical distributions with mathematical equations, the econophysicists came to a “two-class” theory of income distribution in which income coming from labour follows an exponential Boltzmann–Gibbs law distribution (thermal), and property income follows a Pareto power law distribution (superthermal). People have both forms of income, but for the bottom 97-99% of the income distribution labour income is most important and for the top 1-3% property income is critical. Furthermore, they found that while the income inequality within the bottom class of the distribution remains surprisingly stable over time, the upper tail is highly dynamic.

Other: Besides these empirical studies by complexity scholars, there have been many other recent empirical and data-driven studies of inequality within and between countries. The most famous of which is Piketty’s book ‘Capital in the Twenty-First Century’ in which he argues inequality is an inherent feature of capitalism that should be tackled through state intervention, and a global wealth tax in particular. A key argument in the book, which informs its main policy proposal, is that a core mechanism driving inequality is the fact that capital returns are persistently higher than economic growth rates (r>g).

Teaching Materials

Chapters & Papers: 

  • Economics: The User’s Guide by Ha-Joon Chang, from 2014, chapter 9. This brief and accessible pluralist book contains a useful introductory chapter on inequality and poverty.
  • Economics After The Crisis by Irene van Staveren, from 2015, chapter 15. This well-written textbook which in one chapter sets out the neoclassical, post-Keynesian, social economic and institutional perspectives on wellbeing, poverty and wealth inequality.
  • The Economy by The CORE Team, from 2017, chapter 19. This successful textbook introduces students to economic inequality and key econometric findings about it.
  • Introducing a New Economics by Jack Reardon, Maria A. Madi, and Molly S. Cato, from 2017, chapters 4 & 5. This ground-breaking textbook introduces inequality and power and weaves together pluralist theory and real-world knowledge.
  • Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises by Anwar Shaikh, from 2016, chapter 17. This impressive and extensive book compares multiple perspectives on many traditional economic topics and includes a chapter discussing complexity economics’ and Piketty’s insights on inequality as well as global inequality and underdevelopment.
  • The Routledge Handbook of Heterodox Economics: Theorizing, Analyzing, and Transforming Capitalism by Tae-Hee Jo, Lynne Chester, and Carlo D’Ippoliti, from 2017, chapters 9 & 21. This broad and diverse book sets out a variety of theories on distribution, inequality and poverty.
  • Alternative Ideas from 10 (Almost) Forgotten Economists by Irene van Staveren, from 2021, chapter 6. This book emphasizes often ignored and neglected ideas and contains a chapter on the ideas of Veblen, the founder of institutional economics, on inequality.
  • Neoclassical economists’ theories of discrimination by Paula England, from 1994. This chapter sets out the various neoclassical models of discrimination.
  • Gender: An intersectionality perspective by Stephanie A. Shields, from 2008. This paper provides a brief introduction into intersectionality and focuses in more detail on empirical research on gender.
  • Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis by Sumi Cho, Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, and Leslie McCall, from 2013. This article provides an overview of the various interpretations and applications of the concept of intersectionality.
  • Colloquium: Statistical mechanics of money, wealth, and income by Victor Yakovenko and Barkley Rosser, from 2009. This review article provides an overview of the econophysics and complexity economics literature on inequality and their key findings relating to exponential and power-law probability distributions.
  • A behavioral-economics view of poverty by Marianne Bertrand, Sendhil Mullainathan, Eldar Shafir, from 2004. This article sets out a behavioral approach to poverty by recognizing the importance of human cognitive limitations and contrasts this view with the ideas of the “culture of poverty” and hyperrationality.
  • Poverty impedes cognitive function by Anandi Mani, Sendhil Mullainathan, Eldar Shafir, & Jiaying Zhao, from 2013. This influential behavioral economic article investigates the effects that poverty has on cognitive and mental processes. 
  • The enemy between us: The psychological and social costs of inequality by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, from 2017. This influential study provides a useful overview of the various consequences of inequality, such as its impact on status anxiety, depression, narcissism, social cohesion, advertisement, and drugs, alcohol, food, gambling and shopping addictions.
  • Sociological Perspectives on Racial Discrimination by Mario L. Small and Devah Pager, from 2020. This article summarizes the sociological literature and research on racial discrimination for economists and emphasizes the importance of institutions in explaining and understanding observed patterns.

Books: 

  • The Economics of Inequality, Discrimination, Poverty, and Mobility by Robert Rycroft, from 2009. This book introduces students to the various economic aspects of inequality, helping them better understand its causes, mechanisms and consequences.
  • Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty, from 2014. A uniquely influential book on economic equality, looking at the issue from a long run and econometric perspective. 
  • After Piketty: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality by Heather Boushey, J. Bradford DeLong, & Marshall Steinbaum, from 2017. This collection of essays explores how the field of economic inequality should develop, drawing attention to issues such as modeling inequality, measuring wealth inequality, the causes of inequality, policy solutions, and interdisciplinarity.  
  • Anti-Piketty: Capital for the 21st Century by Jean-Philippe Delsol, Emmanuel Martin, & Nicolas Lecaussin, from 2017. This collection of essays from the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, pushes against Piketty’s ideas by arguing inequality has not grown, the rich are not rentiers and that taxation is the problem, not the solution.
  • Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization by Branko Milanovic, from 2016. This book, written by the maker of the famous elephant curve of global inequality, helps students understand how inequality has developed both within and among countries, how it relates to globalization and what policies might be effective.
  • The Rise and Decline of Patriarchal Systems: An Intersectional Political Economy by Nancy Folbre, from 2019. This book, written by a prominent feminist economist, how gender has and still shapes economies and how it (under)values care work.
  • Intersectionality by Patricia Hill Collins and Sirma Bilge, from 2020. This book introduces students to the concept and history of intersectionality as well as its application to topics such as education, economic policy and globalization.
  • The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality by Katharina Pistor, from 2019. This influential book draws attention to the role of law in the economy and gives insight into how it shapes and impacts inequality. 
  • The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, from 2009. A best seller written by two epidemiologists investigating the relation between inequality and social cohesion, health, education, violence, crime and social mobility. 
  • The New Economics of Inequality and Redistribution by Samuel Bowles, Christina M. Fong, Herbert Gintis, & Ugo Pagano, from 2012. This book proposes a new approach to inequality drawing on recent insights on wealth inequality, behavioral economics and the negative consequences of inequality.
  • Econophysics of income and wealth distributions by Bikas K. Chakrabarti, Anirban Chakraborti, Satya R. Chakravarty, Arnab Chatterjee, from 2013. This book sets out research and models on inequality developed by econophysists and complexity economists.

This material has been suggested and edited by:

Donate

This project is brought to you by the Network for Pluralist Economics (Netzwerk Plurale Ökonomik e.V.).  It is committed to diversity and independence and is dependent on donations from people like you. Regular or one-off donations would be greatly appreciated.

 

Donate