ABSTRACT
In 1980, to take a round number, the neoclassical growth model was already firmly established as the standard framework for long-run aggregative economics. Growth accounting, productivity and human capital studies, and other such empirical exercises could all be tucked neatly into a single theoretical package. Of course, there were alternative paradigms, but they remained minority tastes. The Kaldor-Kalecki-RobinsonPasinetti line made life harder for itself by being part of a wholesale attack on mainstream economics. Anyway, it was not ever able to muster a body of serious applied work. Even the very interesting Nelson-Winter model of technological diffusion never caught on.
