Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T08:49:23.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Menger on the Nature of Capital and Its Structure: A Reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2014

Anthony M. Endres  and
David A. Harper
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 103 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Endres, A. M. 1997. Neoclassical Microeconomic Theory: The Founding Austrian Version. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Endres, A. M., and Harper, D. A.. 2011. “Carl Menger and His Followers on the Nature of Capital and Its Structure.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 33 (3): 357–384.Google Scholar
Garrison, R. W. 1990. ‘‘Austrian Capital Theory: The Early Controversies.’’ In Caldwell, B., ed., Carl Menger and His Legacy in Economics. Durham: Duke University Press, pp. 133–154.Google Scholar
Harper, D. A., and Endres, A. M.. 2010. “Capital as a ‘Layer Cake’: A Systems Approach to Capital and Its Multi-level Structure.” Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 74 (1–2): 30–41.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1934. “Carl Menger.” Economica 1 (4): 393–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennings, K. H. [1987] 2005. “Capital as a Factor of Production.” In Eatwell, J.et al., eds., The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics. Volume I. Reprinted in C. Bliss, A. Cohen, and G. Harcourt, eds., Capital Theory. Cheltenham: E. Elgar, pp. 108–122.Google Scholar
Lachmann, L. M. 1956. Capital and Its Structure. London: G. Bell & Sons.Google Scholar
Lachmann, L. M. [1948] 1975a. “Investment Repercussions.” In Lachmann, L., Expectations and the Meaning of Institutions. London & New York: Routledge, pp.131–144.Google Scholar
Lachmann, L. M. 1975b. “Reflections on Hayekian Capital Theory.” In Lachmann, L., Expectations and the Meaning of Institutions. London & New York: Routledge, pp. 198–217.Google Scholar
Lachmann, L. M. 1976. “On Austrian Capital Theory.” In Dolan, E., ed., Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics. Mission, KS: Sheed & Ward, pp. 145–151.Google Scholar
Maki, U. 1990. “Mengerian Economics in Realist Perspective.” In Caldwell, B., ed., Carl Menger and His Legacy in Economics. Durham: Duke University Press, pp. 289–312.Google Scholar
Menger, C. 1871. Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller.Google Scholar
Menger, C. 1883. Untersuchungen über die Methode der Socialwissenschaften und der Politischen öekonomie insbesondere. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Menger, C. 1888. “Zur Theorie des Kapitals.” Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 17: 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menger, C. 1950. Principles of Economics. Translated by Dingwall, J. and Hoselitz, B. F.. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Menger, C. 1985. Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences with Special Reference to Economics. Edited by White, L., translated by Nock, F. J.. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Menger, C. [1876] 1994. Carl Menger’s Lectures to Crown Prince Rudolf of Austria. Edited by Streissler, E., translated by Streissler, M.. Aldershot: E. Elgar.Google Scholar
Milford, K. 2012. “The Empirical Inductivist Economics of Professor Menger.” In Backhaus, J., ed., Handbook of the History of Economic Thought. New York: Springer, pp. 415–436.Google Scholar
Streissler, E. 1969. ‘‘Structural Economic Thought: On the Significance of the Austrian School Today.’’ Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie 3–4: 237–266.Google Scholar
Streissler, E. 1972. “To What Extent was the Austrian School Marginalist?” History of Political Economy: 426–441.Google Scholar
Streissler, E., and Weber, W.. 1973. “The Menger Tradition.” In Hicks, J. and Weber, W., eds., Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 226–232.Google Scholar
Wieser, F. A. [1889] 1930. Der natürliche Werth. Translated by Malloch, C.. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar