In the second half of the 19th century neoclassical economists emerged as a revolt against the school of classical economic thought. Neoclassical economics sought to explain the maximisation of utility with an underlying theory of rational choice theory. In the post war period a movement occurred that sought to synthesis the macroeconomic, long run theories of John Maynard Keynes with the microeconomic, short-run theories of neoclassical economics. This essay will explore how John Hick’s ISLM synthesis of Keynes is related to the neoclassical growth model. In addition it will explore how both the growth model and theory of capital reproduce problems inherent in the explanation of multi-sector economies.
The Keynesian revolution, one of the “most significant events in twentieth century economic science,” disputed society’s adherence to classical laissez-faire economics (Yaroufakis, Halevi, & Theocarakis, 2011). The unsubstantiated ability of the self-clearing markets to maintain equilibrium was challenged during the early twentieth century by John Maynard Keynes in his text The General Theory. Yet as the depression strengthened and the global economic climate changed, a group of economists emerged that ceased to be either anti- or pro-Keynesian. Known as the Neo-Keynesians, they incorporated the macroeconomic framework of Keynes’ theory for understanding short run aggregate issues while the neoclassical model remained relevant for long term microeconomic analysis of growth. With the creation of economic tools, namely the ISLM Model that led to the development of the Neoclassical Synthesis, the economists who interpreted and adapted Keynesian theory became the most influential of their generation.
The ISLM synthesis of Keynes’ General Theory is critical to the construction of the neoclassical model of growth. First developed by John Hicks in 1957, the ISLM model