ABSTRACT
Throughout the twentieth century, economics has been divided into at least two alternative theoretical approaches (with numerous internal differences), mainstream economics and heterodox economics. Mainstream economists practice ecumenicalism or “internal pluralism” and hence treat their heretical brethren with tolerance. This is because they employ many of the same theoretical tools, models, and accompanying discourse and because many theoretical advances in mainstream theory started out as heretical ideas. One-time heretical economists thus often become well-respected mainstream economists.1 In this sense, mainstream economics practices internal pluralism (Davis 2006). But once economists “cross the line” and became associated with heterodox economics, their work is unlikely to be regarded as serious or relevant by their mainstream colleagues. Against this backdrop of disciplinary division and conflict, this chapter explores the foundational role of pluralism in heterodox economics. The first section examines the pluralism or lack of pluralism in the relationship between mainstream and heterodox economics in the United States and the United Kingdom. The second section surveys evidence of pluralism and integration within heterodox economics over the past century. Heterodox economics is a multi-level term that refers to (1) a group of broadly commensurable economic theories – specifically Post Keynesian-Sraffian, Marxist-radical, Institutionalevolutionary, social, feminist, Austrian, and ecological economics – each of which holds a non-commensurable position vis-à-vis mainstream economics; (2) a community of economists who engage with and are associated with one or more of the heterodox approaches; and (3) a coherent, distinct, evolving body of economic theory that draws upon various theoretical contributions by heterodox approaches and from which heterodox economic policy recommendations can be drawn. Within heterodox economics, pluralism therefore refers to engagement across different heterodox approaches and to the commitment to build a community of heterodox economists through professional and theoretical integration. The chapter concludes with an overview of pluralism and heterodox economics today.
