Hello everyone,
I wanted to reach out regarding two topics related to Prof. Anwar Shaikh's work.
In the "Historical Foundations of Political Economy" lectures, Prof. Shaikh mentioned forming a group of students for a research project focused on microeconomics. I’m curious to know if this project took place and whether any research papers or findings emerged from it. As someone specializing in industrial organization, I'm particularly interested in the alternative foundations of microeconomics, and I believe this project could provide valuable insights.
I'm currently reading Prof. Shaikh's book, I've been struck by the dynamics and language he employs. It seems to me that his proposed theoretical structure can be interpreted through a cybernetics/systems theory lens. Concepts like turbulent regulation, undershooting, and overshooting resonate strongly with cybernetics ideas such as homeostasis, negative and positive feedback, and the notion of order emerging from disorder. In fact one of the criticism of neoclassical economics and al. is that they are modeled after classical physics (static equilibrium, billiard ball like action reaction, etc), while systems theory can offer a better framework for analysis. I've even heard some scholars (eg. french sociologist edgar morin) say that marx was a system theoretician before his time. So, I believe that this can be a topic for further study .
I have no ideas on new microeconomics provided by Prof Shaikh, but I know post-keynesians has their own version of microeconomics. In addition, Sraffian economics (shared with many Marxians) can also be identified as micro to some extent
Systems theory, as I see it, is not about a new speculative scheme. It isn't about changing the theory but rather about rooting it in an epistemological and analytic ground that is different from the positivit/mechanistic neoclassical economics. Neither the theories nor the models or the mathematical derivations would change, but we would have a more adequat language and tools to work with. That's first, and second, relating to my question about new micro foundations, I have some vague vision about modelling producers and consumers behaviours based on cybernetic theories (not a new endeavour by the way), that is based on Misesian theory of human action. If that can be done, they would fit perfectly within prof. Shaikh's framework
Replying about point 2, "In fact one of the criticism of neoclassical economics and al. is that they are modeled after classical physics (static equilibrium, billiard ball like action reaction, etc), while systems theory can offer a better framework for analysis." Besides Shaikh's work, here is one other book which critiques neoclassical economics and tries to point in a different direction: "Turbulence in Economics: An Evolutionary Appraisal of Cycles and Complexity in Historical Processes" by Francisco Louçã. It is pretty dense and focuses more on critiquing mainstream economics (spending many chapters, for instance, criticizing the mechanical metaphors drawn from classical physics being applied in mainstream economics) than offering a fully developed alternative. The book does provide a set of contrasts outlined in the table below (from page 177), which is useful for suggesting ways in which a more realistic approach to economics can diverge from the neoclassical framework.
I would also be very interested in the alternative microeconomics fondations. I haven't really seen more than 2 or 3 papers trying to use Shaikh's theory of real competition. About system theory, there's a chapter where Shaikh's discuss that. I think it's the 9th chapter on relative price. He criticises Cockshott approach to the labour theory of value, or something like that. I'll have to check again. The main objective I see, before going into speculative theory, would be to use Shaikh's theory to explain real economics phenomena. Seems to me there are quite a number of alternative theories out there, but few that try to deal with real data in a consistent way.