Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Economic schools of thought on the environment: investigating unity and division

dc.contributor.authorSpash, Clive
dc.contributor.authorRyan, Anthony
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-10T23:09:41Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.date.updated2016-02-24T10:53:01Z
dc.description.abstractHow do ecological and heterodox economists differ, if at all, from each other and from neoclassical economists addressing environmental problems? In 2009 we probed this question by conducting an international survey across these communities, namely at conferences of the European Society for Ecological Economics, the Association for Heterodox Economics, and the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. The research was designed to gain insight into the extent to which ecological economics can be described as heterodox and a distinct field from orthodox environmental and resource economics. Conflicting visions of ecological economics have led to a prevalence of neoclassical articles and thought mixed in amongst more heterodox work. We introduce a novel classification of work in the field of environmental policy in order to test for the existence of differences in terms of methodological and ideological approaches. How heterodox economists understand environmental issues is also an important question to answer if there is to be more collaboration between them and ecological economists. The findings have implications for cooperation and the future direction of both ecological and heterodox economics.
dc.identifier.issn0309-166X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/63408
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.sourceCambridge Journal of Economics
dc.subjectKeywords: ecological economics; environmental policy; ideology; neoclassical theory Ecological economics; Heterodox; Ideology; Methodology; Neoclassical
dc.titleEconomic schools of thought on the environment: investigating unity and division
dc.typeJournal article
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage1121
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage1091
local.contributor.affiliationSpash, Clive, Vienna University of Economics and Business
local.contributor.affiliationRyan, Anthony, College of Medicine, Biology and Environment, ANU
local.contributor.authoruidRyan, Anthony, u4092058
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.absfor140101 - History of Economic Thought
local.identifier.absfor149902 - Ecological Economics
local.identifier.absfor149903 - Heterodox Economics
local.identifier.ariespublicationu4279067xPUB802
local.identifier.citationvolume36
local.identifier.doi10.1093/cje/bes023
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-84866464684
local.identifier.thomsonID000305890400004
local.type.statusPublished Version

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
01_Spash_Economic_schools_of_thought_on_2012.pdf
Size:
1.13 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format