Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms
The text explains six main intellectual frameworks in the economic theories of development based on Cohen's paradigm. Since the publication of Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962, researchers in the natural sciences and then social sciences, particularly economic rese...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies (IHCS)
2017-07-01
|
| Series: | پژوهشنامۀ انتقادی متون و برنامههای علوم انسانی |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://criticalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_2689_9ebf697185dac3944e1b2e4c96ca13cf.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841543758877818880 |
|---|---|
| author | Seyed hossein Mirjalili |
| author_facet | Seyed hossein Mirjalili |
| author_sort | Seyed hossein Mirjalili |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The text explains six main intellectual frameworks in the economic theories of development based on Cohen's paradigm. Since the publication of Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962, researchers in the natural sciences and then social sciences, particularly economic researchers tried to apply paradigmatic analysis in a variety of disciplines including development. Hunt’s book is a good example of such works. Modernization, structuralism, Neo-Marxism, Maoism, basic needs, and Neoclassical Economics as competing paradigms have been discussed in this work. The author explains dependency theory, but he does not recognize it as a paradigm. In this paper, the author’s definition of paradigm has been criticized. Another critique to the text is incommensurability of paradigms that constitute the book's approach.Economic methodologists, who viewed economics from the perspective of Cohen’s scientific revolution, have recognized Keynesian economics as a true paradigm shift in economics, and development economists recognized the shift from modernization to dependency theory as a true paradigm shift in development. Finally, institutionalist approach to economic development was neglected and has not been discussed in the text. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-67cd53d295e340f1a568a0646d2eb44f |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2383-1650 |
| language | fas |
| publishDate | 2017-07-01 |
| publisher | Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies (IHCS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | پژوهشنامۀ انتقادی متون و برنامههای علوم انسانی |
| spelling | doaj-art-67cd53d295e340f1a568a0646d2eb44f2025-01-13T05:34:01ZfasInstitute for Humanities and Cultural Studies (IHCS)پژوهشنامۀ انتقادی متون و برنامههای علوم انسانی2383-16502017-07-011731131332689Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing ParadigmsSeyed hossein Mirjalili0Professor, Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, IranThe text explains six main intellectual frameworks in the economic theories of development based on Cohen's paradigm. Since the publication of Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962, researchers in the natural sciences and then social sciences, particularly economic researchers tried to apply paradigmatic analysis in a variety of disciplines including development. Hunt’s book is a good example of such works. Modernization, structuralism, Neo-Marxism, Maoism, basic needs, and Neoclassical Economics as competing paradigms have been discussed in this work. The author explains dependency theory, but he does not recognize it as a paradigm. In this paper, the author’s definition of paradigm has been criticized. Another critique to the text is incommensurability of paradigms that constitute the book's approach.Economic methodologists, who viewed economics from the perspective of Cohen’s scientific revolution, have recognized Keynesian economics as a true paradigm shift in economics, and development economists recognized the shift from modernization to dependency theory as a true paradigm shift in development. Finally, institutionalist approach to economic development was neglected and has not been discussed in the text.https://criticalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_2689_9ebf697185dac3944e1b2e4c96ca13cf.pdfeconomicsparadigminstitutionalismcritiquedevelopment policy |
| spellingShingle | Seyed hossein Mirjalili Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms پژوهشنامۀ انتقادی متون و برنامههای علوم انسانی economics paradigm institutionalism critique development policy |
| title | Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms |
| title_full | Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms |
| title_fullStr | Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms |
| title_full_unstemmed | Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms |
| title_short | Book Review of Economic Theories of Development: An Analysis of Competing Paradigms |
| title_sort | book review of economic theories of development an analysis of competing paradigms |
| topic | economics paradigm institutionalism critique development policy |
| url | https://criticalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/article_2689_9ebf697185dac3944e1b2e4c96ca13cf.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT seyedhosseinmirjalili bookreviewofeconomictheoriesofdevelopmentananalysisofcompetingparadigms |