Scarcity: The central economic problem is the limited nature of societal resources. Therefore, economics as science should analyse the usage and distribution of scarce resources.

Scarcity: The central economic problem is the scarcity of resources.

Uncertainty: Additionally, uncertainty is a factor in behavioural economics. Persons do not operate using rational calculation in uncertain decision-making situations. Instead they make use of certain decision heuristics.

Uncertainty / Change: For individuals, the coordination of projects and knowledge is the central economic problem. This focus strongly refers to uncertainty, the dispersal of knowledge and information as well as to changing circumstances.

Scarcity: For elder represen­tatives of the Austrian School, the allocation of scarce resources as related to human needs is the central economic problem.

Uncertainty: Due to uncertainty about future events, economic decisions are constrained by informational and cognitive limitations and social dynamics such as animal spirits.

Dominance: Capitalist economies are highly productive but unstable and conflictive systems.

Scarcity: Natural resources and the absorption capacity of sinks are absolutely scarce.

Change: Social and ecological dynamics are central for the analysis of the economy.

Uncertainty: Knowledge about both the social and natural systems is inherently limited, thus we face uncertainty or even ignorance about the relevant processes and interactions.

Change / Uncertainty: Continuous change is the central economic problem. Uncertainty and technical change are the crucial variables which explain economies’ constant deviations from equilibrium.

Dominance: Power relations are the basic drivers of social and economic dynamics. Besides gender relations, these include ethnic and social relations.

Scarcity: Social resources such as money, labour and participation are limited. Therefore, their distribution among social groups is analysed.

Dominance: The central problem is the exploitation of work by capital, i.e. the dominance between classes.

Change: Dynamic processes such as class conflict or accumulation are of special importance. They are historically embedded and change over time.

Change: The central research object is the change of economic systems.

Uncertainty: Uncertainty and fundamental ignorance are the main economic problems.

Scarcity: Scarcity also plays a central role, since competition for scarce resources results in selection pressure.

Change: Due to the historical embeddedness of humans and institutions, temporal development and change, as well as stability are central topics.

Dominance: Power is also an important economic problem. On the one hand, institutions can enhance people’s emancipation. On the other hand, institutions can be used for repression and the preservation of power, status and wealth.

Micro: The axiom of methodo­logical indivi­dualism implies that processes on the macro-level are exclusively derived from actions of individuals on the micro-level. Therefore, all economic phenomena can be explained and described on the basis of individual action.

Micro: The focus lies in the observable behavior of human beings. Hence, central concepts refer to humans and their decisions.

Micro: The assumptions of a strong subjectivism not only implies a methodological but also an ontological individualism. Subjectivism means that the only existent world is that perceived by individuals. Even though aggregates or institutions might be discussed, they can always be reduced to individuals.

Meso: Several actors form a population. The macro level is composed of many rules and several populations, but is defined by the self-organization of populations and structures at the meso level. Hence, processes on the macro-level can only be explained by reference to the meso-level, i.e. the analysis of populations instead of individual actors.

Meso: The focus is on gender relations and their interaction with production regimes, (non-)markets as well as formal and informal institutions (laws, social norms). Hence, the analysis is primarily conducted on the meso-level.

Meso: The unit of analysis is class, not the individual. Collective interests are determined within classes rather than between individuals.

Macro: Inside a certain mode of production there are powerful material and social structures, like competition, that induce people to behave accordingly.

Meso / Macro: Institutions are understood as existing, at least potentially, independently of the humans that have created them. They are, therefore, crucial factors shaping the economy in their own right and stand at the center of attention. As a consequence, research is mostly centered on meso- and macro-level phenomena rather than on individual action.

Meso: Post Keynesians reject the idea that social structures or macroeconomic phenomena can be reduced to the behaviour of individuals. On the contrary, individuals always act in a certain institutional context which itself shapes their beliefs and actions, and connects different classes of agents or types of economic units with each other.

Macro: The capitalist macro-economy forms a system that has to be analysed in a systemic way. What happens in one sector of the economy, also has effects on other sectors.

Meso: The smallest parts of complex systems are agents. Economic agents can be human beings or institutions such as firms, banks or governments. Their interactions are shaped by the decisions of other agents as well as institutions such as the rule of law, culture, and markets.

Macro: Together, institutions and individuals form a complex system. At the same time, the system shapes the institutional structure and human decisions. These elements on their own cannot explain economic phenomena. Economics is more than the sum of its parts

Macro: The economy is an open system which is embedded in the larger systems of society and the biosphere.

Meso: The following issues are emphasized: institutions, power relations, uncertainty and ignorance. In this context, interactions between the economy, society and the environment are analysed.

Insights from behavioural science and cognitive and social psychology are included in the analyses. There is scepticism about the assumption that human beings have pre­defined preferences even over complex environ­mental problems. Rather, prefe­rences have to be formed within delibe­rative, social processes.

Agents are only boundedly rational. Their rationality is limited by the tractability of the decision problem, the cognitive limitations of their minds, and the time available to make the decision. Agents generally do not optimize in the standard sense. Rather, people engage in cognitive processes such as social comparison, imitation and repetitive behavior (habits) so as to efficiently use their limited cognitive resources.

Inside a certain mode of production there are powerful material and social structures, such as competition, that induce people to behave accor­dingly. Therefore, humans are not neces­sarily competitive or collabo­rative but human behavior is affected by the histo­rically specific mode of production.

The analysis focuses on economic subjects who act in a “boundedly rational” way, as opposed to being rational and utility maximi­sing actors. These economic subjects are neither capable of discerning all possible actions nor of assessing their costs and utility. Therefore, they are unable to calculate an optimal course of action. Instead, it is assumed that economic subjects' decisions are based on heuristics.

Individuals cannot be separated from their social and economic contexts, which determine decisions and actions. Hence, humans neither behave auto­nomously nor necessarily rationally or in a utility maximizing fashion.

Due to psycho­logical reasons and fundamental uncer­tainty, individuals compare them­selves to others and build their decisions partly on rules of thumb and habits. Further­more, individuals always act in a certain institu­tional context which shapes their beliefs and actions, and links different classes of agents or types of economic units.

Humans are social beings that derive preferences and value-orientations from the social context they are embedded in as well as from direct inter­actions with other people. Those inter­actions are not restricted to the market, such as relations between producers and consumers, but also comprise personal, political and further social relations.

Humans and their preferences are relatively autonomous and independent of external influences. Actors try to reach their goals, i.e. the maximi­zation of their utility, according to their preferences as efficiently as possible.

Both the analytic concept of the simplis­tically constructed homo economicus and the related concepts of instrumental rationalism, utility maximi­zation and perfect information exist alongside conceptions of human beings including social elements such as insti­tutions, power and social context.

Rules, heuristics, beliefs, desires, moods, emotions etc. all determine the behavior of individuals.

Atomistic: Only individuals know what is best for the individual. This view rejects the influence or valuation by external institutions such as religion. This can on the one hand be interpreted as an ontological focus on the individual, meaning that there is a rejection of economic phenomena and structures which can not be reduced to the individual. On the other hand, this can be understood methodo­logically. In this case, social phenomena can only be explained with reference to individuals.

Middle: There is neither a mere methodo­logical individualism nor a solely methodo­logical collectivism. Instead there are selection mechanisms both on the level of individuals and on the level of super­ordinate entities.

Middle: The relevance of context is acknow­ledged here. This does not mean that the focus on individuals as acting subjects is abandoned, but that individuals’ actions receive different inputs, depending on the historical context.

Middle: The question of whether prefe­rences are rooted in humans them­selves or, rather, influenced by external factors is currently debated and not conclusively answered.

Contextual: Humans are social beings that derive preferences and value-orientations from direct interactions and the social context they are embedded in.

Contextual: Interactions are shaped by the decisions of other agents as well as institutions such as the rule of law, culture, and markets. They are also bounded by environ­mental constraints. Together, institutions and individuals form a complex system. At the same time, the system shapes the institutional structure and human decisions. These elements on their own cannot explain economic phenomena. Economics is more than the sum of its parts.

Contextual: The view of the world is holistic. Collectives and systems are not simply sums of their parts, they are complex entities with their own characte­ristics and behavioural properties.

Contextual: Actors are embedded in a social and economic context. Hence, economic phenomena cannot be considered as isolated entities. Spheres that are often conceived as being separate, such as the public and the private, the reproductive and the productive, the social and the economic sphere, are logically connected.

Contextual: The world is not made out of particulars that can be isolated for the purpose of analysis. Instead entities like classes, firms, states, and institutions exist within a context, which is essential to their existence.

Contextual: Macro-phenomena might exhibit emergent properties that cannot be fully explained by aggregating individual actions. These phenomena in turn affect individual behaviour, an approach that has been described as “holism”.

Static: The conception of time aims to identi­fy, compare and assess static situations rather than aiming to under­stand and reconstruct a sequence of dynamic processes.

Middle: While static analysis is not completely absent, the focus is on dynamics and change.

Middle: The economy is a dynamic system that is subject to constant changes. Yet, static situations can be identified and are considered to be useful for scientific findings. Analyses are therefore conducted with comparative-statics as well as dynamic methods.

Middle: The conception of time is rather static. Even if time­inconsistent preferences have certain dynamics, the result of those dynamics isn’t generally open or undefined.

Dynamic: Economic phenomena are processes situated in time and space. Although insti­tutions are by their very nature under­stood as (more or less) durable and thus stable over time, under­standing change and the processes by which change occurs is a central preoccu­pation.

Middle: Time is often explicitly modeled using discrete time, often the case in computa­tional models, or continuous time, often the case in analytical models. Time plays an important role due to path-dependence. The present and past states of economic systems rely on its past. The economy becomes a system that evolves procedurally in a series of events, it becomes algorithmic.

Dynamic: Both uncertainty and variable prefe­rences imply a dynamic conception of time. It is assumed that people's decisions today directly influence the future. Humans make plans based on present know­ledge and expec­tations about the future.

Dynamic: Social and economic processes are subject to constant change.

Dynamic: Dynamic processes like class conflict or accumu­lation are central for analysis of the economy. They are historically embedded and change over time.

Dynamic: The dynamics of economic systems are analysed in historical time.

Realism: Neoclassical economics is pre­occupied with the scienti­fically neutral extraction of real causalities. This implies a subscription to a positivist world­view, in which the economic reality can be observed and modelled.

Realism: Due to the inherently inter­disciplinary focus, with heavy influences from biology, climate science, physics and other natural sciences, there is a strong orien­tation towards the empirical testing of theories and hypo­theses.

Realism: Capitalist economies are composed of certain social structures that exist inde­pendently of scientific obser­vation.

Realism: Human behaviour can be observed and described by scientists in a relatively unproble­matic fashion.

Middle: The assumption of funda­mental uncertainty entails that know­ledge can always turn out to be an absence of knowledge, which means that statements are always hypo­thetical. According to this episte­mology, there is at least one reality that is inde­pendent from humans. This reality does have a structure in which causal relations are existent and can at least partially be under­stood.

Middle: Even though there is a tradi­tion of positi­vist research, the epistemo­logical problem of getting access to the real world is acknowledged.

Middle: The fallible nature of science as well as its theory laden and stand­point dependent character are acknow­ledged. Despite this, judgements as to whether theories are good or bad are possible by reference to the real world.

Middle: Knowledge is situated and is produced out of a certain power structure. Scientists are embedded in a historical, cultural, social and economic context from which scientific findings emerge. However, objectivity can be strengthened by recognizing and integrating diverse fields of knowledge.

Middle: True complexity as the property of a real world system means that no model is able to adequately capture all its properties.

Constructivist: Know­ledge related to social phenomena is generated through individuals’ inter­pre­tations and hence can be conceived of as socially constructed. Friedrich von Hayek has illus­trated this point by stating that as far as human behaviour is concerned, things are what people think that they are.

Perspective: The general objective of economics in such a view is to tell plau­sible stories about the functioning of the economic system in the real world, starting from stylized facts.

Perspective: Even if some approaches weaken the general validity of central assumptions, there are general theoretical concepts which often serve as a starting point for the analysis. Accordingly, different societies, economies, and economic sectors are analysed using, for example, the labour theory of value, theories of power and hegemony or dialectical materialism.

Perspective: The laws of thermo­dynamics are fundamentally relevant for economics.

Perspective: A certain mode of thought, viewing the world as a complex system, is applied to all sorts of economic problems.

Perspective: The characte­ristics of the object of inquiry are less relevant to model and theory building than the method, which is defined by the perspective.

Perspective: The universal validity and broad scope of economic principles are central, i.e. rational, cost efficient actions by indivi­duals to fulfill their goals, as well as the impor­tance of concepts such as subjectivism and indivi­dualism.

Contested: There exists a certain tension. On the one hand, the focus is on the object of human behaviour regarding economic decision making. On the other hand, results are interpreted in light of the theore­tical back­ground of established neo­classical economic theory.

Object: The central objects of investigation are social insti­tutions and their impli­cations in so far as they relate to the economy.

Object: The role of gender relations in the economy are investigated from different theoretical perspectives.

Object: The objects of inquiry are processes of change, such as economic growth, innovation, structural change, techno­logical change, institu­tional change or economic develop­ment more generally. The perspec­tives used to investi­gate these processes vary greatly.

Deductive: Starting from axioms, hypo­theses are derived from theore­tical conside­rations. However, this does not mean that hypo­theses are not related to feed­back from empirical obser­vations.

Deductive: Deduction and apriorism play an important role, while empirical observations are often rejected as the basis of knowledge generation.

Middle: To understand why an observed economic phenomena occurs, theories are developed which are formalized using mathematical models. These models yield several hypotheses which can be tested. These hypotheses should then be applied to empirical data. Using the data, scientists will then try to reject the theory. If a theory has been rigorously tested and not rejected it becomes a plausible representation of reality until it is rejected.

Middle: Research is often conducted in a formal theore­tical and empi­rical framework in the deducti­vist tradition. Inductive research, however, is considered similarly fruitful since it offers the oppor­tunity to generate new cate­gories and hypo­theses.

Middle: A central element of analysis is dialectics. Dialectics claims to trans­cend the classical logic of direct causation and linear relation­ships and replaces it with a dynamic under­standing of processes as well as with different cate­gories. In dialec­tical reasoning simple and abstract concepts are combined with the characte­ristics of a concrete situation.

Middle: There is both deductive and inductive research. Yet, there is not always the desire to gene­ralize know­ledge. Instead, the limited nature of knowledge and scientific insights is acknow­ledged as well as its limits with regards to the spatial and temporal context.

Middle: Theore­tical assump­tions are based on empirical evidence. However, that does not mean that all theore­tical assump­tions are sought to be strictly proven by inductive reasoning, i.e. statis­tical evidence. Theore­tical assump­tions should be in line with basic empirical knowledge of actual economic behaviour and phenomena. Additionally, logical reasoning plays an important role.

Middle: Ecological Economics uses a wide range of methods which have creden­tials in both induc­tive and deduc­tive approaches.

Middle: Hypotheses are not generated in a uniform way. On the one hand, the emphasis on empi­rical analysis of obser­vable behaviour implies an inductive research strategy. On the other hand, hypo­theses are derived from the deductive concept of the homo economicus and weakened forms of this ideal type.

Inductive: The relative emphasis on empirical work implies a mainly induc­tive approach. Nonethe­less there are many instances which could be considered a combination of deduction and induction.

Formalistic: Form­al­math­em­at­ic­al mod­els are built in or­der to de­scribe eco­nom­ic re­la­tions. These eco­nom­ic re­la­tions are con­sidered to dis­play reg­u­lar­it­ies that can be form­al­ized by using mod­els.

Formalistic: To understand why the phenomenon occurs, theories are developed and formalized using mathe­matical models. When done right, mathe­matical models are un­ambiguous and they expose internal incon­sistencies and implied predictions.

Middle: The meth­od­o­logy is re­l­at­ively di­verse and ranges from de­duct­ive the­or­ies to in­duct­ive and dia­lect­ical meth­odo­logies. Often, analyses are conducted formally and empiri­cally in the deductive tradition. Never­theless, a broad variety of models and methods is used depending on which is best suited for the respective research question.

Middle: Formalized models and quanti­tative empirical methods are used as well as quali­tative methods.

Middle: Lo­gic­al reas­on­ing plays an im­port­ant role. However, not ne­ces­sar­ily every rel­ev­ant as­sump­tion or hy­po­thes­is is casted into a formal frame­work. To do so would imply a de­gree of pre­ci­sion that may simply be not at­tain­able due to the qualitative complexity of the phe­nomenon under scrutiny, e.g. herd be­ha­viour in fin­an­cial mar­kets.

Middle: Dia­lectics claims to tran­scend the classical logic of direct causation and linear rela­tion­ships. It applies a dynamic under­standing of pro­cesses as well as dealing with cat­egor­ies that could be con­sidered con­tra­dictory in clas­sical terms.

Middle: Based on a post-normal under­standing of science, the primary in­terest is not simply to under­stand the world around us, but also to tackle specific problems faced by society, particu­larly concerning sustain­ability­related problems.

Middle: Hypo­theses are not generated according to a uniform process.

Broad reasoning: There is a broad vari­ety of invest­iga­tions and mid-range the­or­ies. Researchers have gener­ally had the am­bi­tion to piece these in­sights together, not in order to construct an intern­ally co­her­ent grand theory, but in order to obtain an ever more complete picture of the complex reality of socio­economic organization.

Broad reasoning: Issues are often addressed by means of verbal descrip­tions as well as by using histor­ical examples for purposes of illus­tration. Addition­ally, thought experiments and counter­factuals are methods that are sometimes used.

Standardised and prescriptive methodology: Eco­no­metrics provides the statist­ical and mathematical tools which are used to test the mathematical models. These models are best suited to uncover causal relationships. Econometrics aims at further developing and improving models in order to ensure empirical adequacy.

Standardised and prescriptive methodology: The structural para­meters of the models used are often empir­ic­ally estimated through standard econo­metric tech­niques. Like­wise, theor­etical hypo­theses may be empiric­ally tested through econo­metrics.

Standardised and prescriptive methodology: Preferably, mathematical models are used to formalize theories. These models yield several hypotheses which can be tested. These hypotheses should then be applied to empirical data.

Standardised and prescriptive methodology: The over­arching goal of the methodo­logy is to determine the presence of causal effects. By using experimental designs with a treatment and a control group, a counter­factual situation is recon­structed as good as pos­sible in order to isolate the effect of a single measure or situation change.

Middle: Feminist economics works with both qualit­ative and quantit­ative techniques. Qualit­ative research is under­taken in or­der to un­cover multi-level struc­tures of in­equal­ity. Quantit­ative methods on the other hand, are used to, for example, include gender in statist­ical analysis. The methods used range accord­ingly from econo­metrics to discourse analysis.

Middle: The choice of methods is quite eclectic. Formal mathematical models exist along­side discourse analysis and detailed case studies.

Middle: Alongside the well-established regression techniques, Social Network Analysis is used to investigate the evolution of networks. Further methods used include agent-based and computational modeling, as well as evolutionary game theory.

Middle: There is a strong orient­ation towards empirical testing of theories and hypo­theses, which is based on a moderate falsi­fica­tionism.

Idiosyncratic: Often case stud­ies and question­naires are carried out. Yet far from confin­ing methods to a rigid set, the object of research determines the methods and strategies and can include both qualit­ative and quantit­ative research methods.

Idiosyncratic: Argu­ments are often communicated by verbal descrip­tions (literary economics) as well as by using historical examples for purposes of illustration. Addition­ally, thought exper­i­ments and counter­factuals form part of the methods of choice.

• Systems perspective
• Termodynamics (entropy)
• Material throughput
• Carrying capacity of the earth
• Limits to growth
• (Strong) sustainability
• Precautionary principle
• Economy as embedded system
• Natural sinks

• Bounded rationality
• Uncertainty
• Path dependency
• Complex systems
• Social rules
• Emergence
• Risk and uncertainty
• Heterogeneous agents
• Absence of a central planner
• Continuous adaptation
• Dynamics of imbalance
• Continuous innovation (evolution)

• Contradictions of capitalism
• Relations of production
• Classes
• Exploitation
• (Over-)accumulation of capital
• Surplus value
• Use value, exchange value and value (labour theory of value)
• Alienation

• Evolution
• Systems
• Emergence
• Concept of populations
• Knowledge
• Social rules
• Variation-selection-conservation
• Innovation
• Path dependency and historical time

• Gender inequalities
• Reproductive activities
• Situated knowledge
• Gender
• Power and hierarchies
• Intersectionality
• Social context

• Effective demand
• Tendency to instability (e.g by animal spirits)
• Capitalist monetary production economy
• Macroeconomic paradoxes
• Fundamental uncertainty
• Hierarchy of markets
• Endogenous money creation
• Path dependency and historical time
• Non-neutrality of money

• Social provisioning process: production, distribution and consumption
• Social rules
• Customs, routines, instincts and practices
• Path dependency and historical time
• Formal and informal institutions
• Social context
• (Co-)evolution
• Instrumental and ceremonial institutions
• Economy as embedded system

• Equilibrium
• Efficiency and optimization (allocation of resources)
• Methodological Individualism
• Utilitarianism (utility maximization)
• Marginalism
• Positivism (Value free science)
• Subjective value
• Instrumental Rationality (also economic principle)
• Incentives

• Methodological individualism
• Market as process
• Subjective value
• Opportunity costs
• Markets as aggregates of information
• Spontaneous order
• Entrepreneurial discovery
• Marginalism

• Bounded rationality
• Heuristics
• Overconfidence
• Rules of thumb
• Time inconsistency
• Social preferences
• Law of small numbers
• Framing
• Nudging