2026/05/04 by Angela Ambrosino, Mario Cedrini, John B. Davis · 1 voice
Social Sciences · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · #Political Economy and Marxism #Economic Theory and Institutions #Culture, Economy, and Development Studies
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/09672567.2026.2674646
openalex publication_date 2026/05/04 · openalex created_date 2026/05/23 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/16
In responding to Heisse’s comments in this journal on our article “Today’s economics: one, no one and one hundred thousand” (2024), we clarify that we do not believe economics is already pluralistic, nor that heterodoxy is being taken seriously by the mainstream. As against Heisse’s “everything holds together” thesis, we argue that various factors—including the transformative impact of other disciplines—are bringing about changes in economics, which are not examples of (new) economics imperialism. The path to pluralism depends also on understanding how the discipline is evolving—the actual state of diversity in approaches and content within economics research.