15 Key Schools of Thought in Economics
From mercantilism to modern economics, comprehensively tracing the historical context and theoretical contributions of 15 key economic schools, building a global map of economic thought for you.
15 key schools of thought in economics
"Whether for individuals or for society, in modern industrial society, the real factor that drives production is a concept, or what some prefer to call 'global vision'. It is a holistic concept, a global grasp of the complete pattern." — Peter Drucker
Having a global perspective is like having a universal map in an unfamiliar space.
You can see the whole picture, as well as its logic, order, and purpose, so that your mind is no longer confused, disorderly, and mysterious.
If you don't understand economics and only see the two major schools of mercantilism and physiocracy, what would you guess?
Perhaps you think that agrarianism appeared before mercantilism. After all, in Chinese culture, there is the concept of "scholars, farmers, artisans, and merchants," with "farmers" always coming before "merchants."
Perhaps you feel that there is a clear temporal distinction between mercantilism and physiocracy.
Perhaps you may also feel that mercantilism is a substitute for physiocracy, or that physiocracy is a substitute for mercantilism.
But the fact is that mercantilism did not only appear before physiocracy. They coexisted during a specific period of time until 1776, when Smith published The Wealth of Nations, which brought an end to both mercantilism and physiocracy. Since then, classical economics has led the way.
If you don't understand economics, seeing terms such as classical school, neoclassical school, marginal school, Austrian school, Chicago school, etc., will only confuse you. You won't know what they represent, how they are related, or what they mean to us today.
Below, I will start from the beginning and sort out the relationships between them.
With this, we pay tribute to the brilliant constellations of human history.
01 Key Schools of Thought in the Past and Present
... (Dedicated to unknown predecessors)
1\. Mercantilism (1500-1776)
Influenced by ancient Greek philosophy, ancient Roman agronomy, and medieval theology, mercantilism can be traced back to the mid-15th century.
Even though there are developmental differences between countries and regions, there is a certain consensus in academia that mercantilism mainly existed between 1500 and 1776.
But this does not mean that mercantilism completely disappeared from the world before 1500 or after 1776.
It hasn't disappeared, it's just so quiet that hardly anyone notices it.
In the past, Italy faced economic decline and attempted to rescue itself through mercantilism.
Now, ...
In the past, Britain gained its position as a major world economic power through mercantilism.
Later, it was replaced by classical economics.
Although mercantilism advocated that gold and silver were the best forms of wealth, promoted nationalism, and advocated state intervention and protection of domestic trade, it did not make any direct contributions to economic theory, but it did make some indirect contributions.
For example, the nationalism they advocated continues to influence the present day.
For example, their emphasis on merchants elevated them from second-class citizens in the eyes of the aristocracy to people with social status and dignity.
For example, their emphasis on international trade continues to this day.
The legendary mercantilists were mainly Thomas More, Gerard Mallinches, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, William Petty (a typical representative), Charles Davenport, and Bernard Mandeville.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
2\. Agrarianism (1756-1776)
Agriculturalism first appeared in France, where mercantilism was popular.
The main figures were Bouazizi Bel, Richard Cantillon, François Quesnay (recognized leader), and Anne Robert Jacques Turgot (Turgot).
They mainly advocated natural order, laissez-faire, and emphasized agriculture, stressing taxation of landowners...
These ideas were undoubtedly a breath of fresh air for France at that time, which was overwhelmed by excessive regulation, heavy taxation, and serious rural issues, and directly contributed to the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789.
Even if agrarianism was only valued for 20 years.
Their admiration for the natural order also laid the foundation for classical economics: the recognition that objective laws exist in human society.
At the same time, they also encouraged free domestic trade in grains, stimulated agricultural exports and imports of manufactured goods, and inadvertently promoted industrial development.
However, their limitation lies in believing that only land can generate surplus value, encouraging taxation of landowners, and ignoring the existence of commerce and industry.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
3.4 Books that help you understand society better
3\. The Classical School (1776–1871)
On March 9, 1776, Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" was officially published, marking the beginning of the classical economics era and the end of mercantilism and physiocracy.
Like mercantilism and agrarianism, classical economics did not appear suddenly.
Before that, it was essential to have the groundwork laid and conclusions drawn by our predecessors, as well as the influence and guidance provided by the times.
William Petty (representative of mercantilism), Richard Cantillon (representative of physiocracy), and David Hume were the main pioneers, and the intellectual revolution, scientific revolution, and industrial revolution that they initiated in Europe were influential factors.
As the founder of the school, Adam Smith combined the scattered ideas of his predecessors with reality and assembled his own economic system.
Since then, economics has separated from political science and become an independent discipline.
Later thinkers, such as Thomas Robert Malthus (pessimist), David Ricardo (pessimist), Jeremy Bentham (a divergent thinker), Jean-Baptiste Say (a divergent thinker), Nassau William Senior (a divergent thinker), Frédéric Bastiat (a divergent thinker), and John Stuart Mill (the younger Mill, a synthesizer) enriched the ideas of the classical school.
They advocate minimal government intervention, personal freedom, self-interested economic behavior, and harmony of interests, believing that all economic resources and economic activities are equally important.
They also summarized some objective economic laws that exist in human society.
For example, comparative advantage theory, the law of diminishing returns, population theory...
For example, market rules, land rent theory, quantity theory of money, labor value theory...
The classical school did indeed advocate free trade, emphasizing economic laws, the concept of consumer sovereignty, and the importance of capital accumulation for economic growth, believing that market mechanisms promoted social and economic development.
However, however, however, unrestrained freedom will only lead to economic depression and monopoly...
This shows that classicism is not a panacea.
Therefore, from the mid-19th century onwards, the classical school split into three schools of thought: socialism, the German historical school, and the marginal utility school. Each of these schools criticized and challenged the classical school in its own way.
The formal end of classical economics came in 1871 with the emergence of the marginal utility school. Carl Menger, William Stanley Jevons, and Léon Walras successively published theories based on demand.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
3.4 Books that help you understand society better
4\. Socialism (1800–present)
The emergence of socialism originated from the criticism of classicalism by socialists.
In 1800, utopian socialists observed that workers' conditions during the Industrial Revolution were deteriorating, and they gradually became weak, disorganized, demoralized, and even unaware of their own power.
Thus, they began to criticize classical liberalism's harmony of interests, arguing that society is composed of different classes with conflicting interests. They began to criticize classical liberalism's laissez-faire, arguing that the government is the potential advanced representative of the interests of the working class. They began to criticize classical liberal Say's market theorem, proposing the idea of perfect social cooperation.
Marx was also deeply influenced by utopian socialism, setting the ultimate goal of communism as the pursuit of human freedom, liberation, and comprehensive development.
However, unlike other socialists, Marx both criticized and inherited classicalism.
Marx adopted the "labor theory of value" from Ricardo, proposed the theory of surplus value, formed his own theory of exploitation, and incidentally resolved two contradictions in Ricardo's theory: the contradiction between the law of value and the law of profit, and the contradiction between the law of value and the law of the average rate of profit. He thus developed his own theory of social development.
It should be noted here that Marx's socialism is only one type of socialism and is not synonymous with the school of socialism as a whole.
After all, there are still Christian socialism, revisionism, unionism, guild socialism, and so on within the socialist school of thought.
The reason why we tend to equate Marx's socialism with the entire school of socialism is mainly because of the availability heuristic and representativeness heuristic in our brains.
Their existence makes us tend to exaggerate the probability of things that are easy to remember and to generalize based on partial information.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
3.4 Books that help you understand society better
5\. The German Historical School (1841–1917)
The German Historical School began in 1841 with the publication of Friedrich List's "The National System of Political Economy." It ended in 1917 with the death of Gustav Schmoller, who led the school to its peak.
Like socialism, the German historical school was also generally critical of classical economics.
The difference is that the German historical school did not criticize classical economics in the context of the Industrial Revolution or the rapid development of capitalism, but rather in the context of its own purely agricultural background and a newly unified country where all industries were still in their infancy.
Historical schools of thought believe that classical economics, which is applicable to the economic development of capitalist countries such as Britain and France, is not necessarily applicable to Germany.
Therefore, they encouraged the German government to actively intervene in industry, transportation, and the economy, rather than advocating laissez-faire government as the classical school did.
At the same time, the historical school also emphasizes the importance of studying economics from a historical perspective, utilizing primary data and researching changing social systems, conducting extensive inductive research to discover underlying development patterns, and forming a theoretical system that is correct and effective for a specific period, rather than adopting the abstract, deductive, static, unrealistic, and ahistorical analytical methods of the classical school and marginal school.
The historical school was generally consistent in its criticism of classicism, but due to differences in the purpose of criticism and time, there were distinctions between the old and new schools.
The old school of history mainly attempted to supplement classical theory to a certain extent, and the main figures involved were William Roscher, Brand, and Knes.
The new historical school mainly attempted to completely replace classical theory with its own theories. Gustav Schmoller, Max Weber, Wagner, and Sombart were key figures.
With Schmorl's passing, the German historical school also disappeared from history.
However, it has secured a place for historical induction in economic research methods, thereby fulfilling its historical mission.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
3.4 Books that help you understand society better
6\. Marginal School (1871–present)
The marginalist school is based on marginal utility theory.
In 1871, Carl Menger of Austria and William Stanley Jevons of the United Kingdom published Principles of National Economy and Theory of Political Economy, respectively, in which they independently expounded their thoughts on marginal utility theory.
In 1874, French economist Léon Walras published his own work exploring marginal utility theory, entitled "Elements of Pure Economics."
Although the theories discussed in these three books have different names, their essence is similar. Therefore, these three books were later recognized as the founding works of the marginal school, and these three people were recognized as the founders of the marginal school.
It was also from them that the Austrian school of economics, led by Menger, and the Lausanne school, led by Walras, emerged in the field of economics.
The former's disciples mainly included Friedrich von Wieser and Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, who were regarded by later generations as the founders of the Austrian School. The latter's disciples mainly included Vilfredo Pareto.
Their relationship with the marginalist school is like that between regional subsidiaries and a parent company. As a school grows, local organizations will inevitably emerge, and their focus will also differ.
Some scholars focus more on "marginal," "utility," and "abstract deduction," while others focus more on "micro," "competition," "demand," and "price."
But overall, the marginalist school is consistent with classical economics in terms of inheritance and development.
They generally agree with the classical economic assumptions of rational economic behavior, the use of abstract deductive methods, a focus on marginal analysis, and minimal government intervention.
Of course, they also generally opposed the classical view that "supply determines price," assuming perfect competition and arguing that "demand determines price." They emphasized subjective utility and microeconomics, advocated equilibrium, and regarded land as a capital good...
With each generation, many theories of the marginalist school became the foundation of the neoclassical school.
In the end, with the evolution of history, the marginalist school became part of neoclassical economics and modern microeconomics.
Currently, marginal utility theory has completely replaced labor value theory as the mainstream theory in economics.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
7\. The Austrian School (1871–present)
The founders of the Austrian School were Menger, Friedrich von Wieser, and Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk.
They were often active at the University of Vienna in Austria and belonged to the old Austrian school.
Mises, Hayek, Schumpeter, and others also studied at the University of Vienna under Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk. This group, along with subsequent representatives of the Austrian School, were no longer confined to Austria due to the war, and thus became known as the New Austrian School.
Although distributed across different regions, they still adopt the Austrian School's "human behavior" analysis method, advocate individualism, and emphasize opportunity cost and marginal utility theory.
Although the core ideas of the Austrian School have been largely absorbed by mainstream economics, and Hayek even stated in 1968 that the Austrian School "can no longer be regarded as an independent school of thought," the uniqueness of the Austrian School in economics remains undeniable.
For example, when other schools were adopting inductive logic as their method of analysis, only the Austrian school, and only Mises, pioneered a method of economic analysis based on deductive logic. Through his own efforts, he brought the Austrian school back from the margins of economics to its core position.
From then on, Mises's analysis of "human action" became the foundation of the entire Austrian school of economics and its unique feature.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
8\. Neoclassical School (1890–present)
The Neoclassical School, as the name suggests, is a new school of thought based on the Classical School.
It differs from socialism, the German historical school, and the marginal school. It is neither a differentiation from nor a critique of the classical school, but rather a process of development and integration.
As the founder of the neoclassical school, Alfred Marshall built upon the classical school's supply theory, incorporating the marginalist school's demand theory and analytical methods. He ultimately developed his own equilibrium value theory, which posits that supply and demand jointly determine commodity prices, thereby establishing the fundamental analytical framework of modern microeconomics.
In 1890, the publication of Principles of Economics and the emergence of the neoclassical school brought economics to new heights.
Subsequently, welfare economics emerged under the influence of Pareto and Pigou, monetary economics under Wicksell and Fisher, and imperfect competition economics under Sraffa, Robinson, Chamberlain, and others, filling the gaps in neoclassical theory in specific areas.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
9\. Institutionalism (1900-present)
In 1900, American capitalism developed rapidly, and the market shifted from free competition to monopoly.
At this point, people began to realize that the neo-classical economic theory of "minimal government intervention leads to maximum social welfare" was untenable.
At this point, people began to pay more attention to monopoly, poverty, depression, and waste.
It was also at this time that Thorstein Veblen published his first book, and the institutional school began to emerge.
They opposed the abstract deductive method adopted by the classical and neoclassical schools and advocated the historical inductive method adopted by the German historical school.
They oppose "harmonious interests" and emphasize "conflicting interests"; they oppose excessive freedom and emphasize institutions and democracy; they oppose balanced self-regulation and emphasize causal relationships.
They oppose "hedonism" and believe that neoclassicism, which bears the shadow of Benthamism, oversimplifies human nature, emphasizing certain psychological views found in Freud and behaviorism.
They also oppose the "rational man" assumption promoted by the classical and neoclassical schools, advocating instead the "socially and culturally conditioned man" assumption. They emphasize that economics must be considered as a whole, encompassing both individual and collective activities, and stress the need for economics to integrate with political science, sociology, law, psychology, history, religious beliefs, and other disciplines.
Therefore, within the institutional school, there are also many sub-schools.
For example, Thorstein Veblen, as the founder of the institutional school, represents the sociological school within the institutional school.
For example, Mitchell, as a student of Veblen, conducted extensive research in statistics and economic fluctuations. He represented the empirical school of statistics and advocated the use of statistical data to study economic phenomena.
For example, Commons emphasized the role of law in economic development and represented the legal school of institutionalism.
This emphasis on the overall situation and concern for political freedom was later absorbed and replaced by Keynesianism and post-Keynesianism.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
10\. Keynesian School (1936–present)
The Keynesian school appeared in 1936.
That year, John Maynard Keynes published The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, which integrated various ideas that had emerged before the Great Depression of 1929 that focused on the total economy and macroeconomics, such as mercantilist state intervention, Petty's fiscal theory, Malthus's theory of market oversupply, and Mitchell's research on economic fluctuations, into a complete analytical framework.
It was also with this book that modern macroeconomics took shape and modern economics began.
When the times changed and everything began to spiral out of control, fall into decline, and become volatile, the old theories no longer applied. In this book, Keynes proposed a new explanation and offered new solutions.
He believed that the market was not in full employment equilibrium and that resources were not fully utilized. On the contrary, he believed that the market was not in full employment and that resources, technology, and costs were limited.
In this case, national income depends on the level of employment, which in turn depends on effective demand in society. Effective demand in society is the sum of consumer demand and investment demand.
Therefore, he believed that the core theory of economics should not be the theory of value determination, but rather the theory of national income determination.
In addition, he believed that the market was not a perfectly competitive market as classical economists claimed, but rather a non-perfectly competitive market in which prices, wages, and interest rates were downwardly rigid. Savings did not determine investment, and interest rates were not an effective lever for regulating savings and investment. These were different types of behavior determined by different factors, and it was difficult to coordinate them. Money was not merely a medium of exchange, but also an asset with value storage.
Keynes studied under Marshall, and although he did not agree with some of the arguments of the classical and neoclassical schools, he still used many of the assumptions, methods, and concepts of neoclassical economics.
For example, based on the subjective psychological methods of the neoclassical school, he analyzed the three major psychological laws that affect effective social demand: diminishing marginal propensity to consume, diminishing marginal efficiency of capital, and liquidity preference. He then analyzed the three variables that ultimately determine national income and employment: psychological propensity to consume, marginal efficiency of capital, and interest rates.
By the 1950s and 1960s, the Keynesian school had split into two branches. One was the neoclassical synthesis represented by Samuelson, and the other was the post-Keynesian school represented by Robinson.
The former inherited and developed Keynesian economics, completed the integration of neoclassical microeconomics and Keynesian macroeconomics, and entered the mainstream of economics. The latter, on the other hand, was more of a negation and criticism of Keynesianism.
Around 1970, the market experienced "stagflation," with not only a decline or even stagnation in production and a sharp rise in unemployment, but also a general trend of rising prices.
Keynesianism has lost its magic at this moment.
Until the 1980s, the New Keynesian school (Stiglitz et al.) proposed a new interpretation based on the Keynesian school and its critics.
For example, in explaining economic fluctuations, the New Keynesian school emphasizes nominal price rigidity rather than nominal wage rigidity.
For example, in explaining wage stickiness and price stickiness, the New Keynesian school emphasizes not only imperfect competition but also imperfect information.
For example, New Keynesian economics proposed a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model to explain economic fluctuations and evaluate macroeconomic cycle policies, replacing the original economic cycle model.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
3\. Four books for beginners to economics
11\. The Chicago School (1930s–present)
The Chicago School emerged almost simultaneously with the Keynesian School. Founded by Frank Knight at the University of Chicago, it was based on neoclassical economics and was a variant of neoclassical economics, also known as the new classical economics.
They advocate economic liberalism and oppose the state intervention promoted by Keynesian economics.
However, its modernization began in 1946, when Milton Friedman, a student of Frank Knight, returned to the University of Chicago and became a faculty member. Together with George Stigler, who also returned to the University of Chicago in 1948 and was a student of Frank Knight, he established the uniqueness of this school of thought.
For example, they believe that Keynesian state intervention policies were the main cause of economic "stagflation," so they advocate laissez-faire.
For example, they believe that inflation is a monetary phenomenon, short-term monetary policy is effective, and long-term monetary policy is ineffective, so they advocate a "single rule" monetary policy.
For example, they emphasize mathematical reasoning, but differ from the New Austrian School. They stress the use of economic theory as a tool to analyze numerous specific problems, rather than abstract mathematical structures that are flashy but impractical. They insist on empirical research to verify theoretical generalizations and oppose the separation of theory from practice.
All of this was almost invisible and unheard of in the market during the period of economic prosperity, and few people recognized or followed it until the 1970s, when "stagflation" appeared and Keynesianism lost its effectiveness.
The existence of stagflation has led to renewed interest in various neoliberal schools of thought, such as the Chicago School, the New Institutional School, and the New Austrian School, which have emerged as counterweights to Keynesianism.
Also in the 1970s, Robert Lucas sparked a rational expectations revolution, advocating that economic agents' expectations are rational and that monetary policy is ineffective not only in the long term but also in the short term.
At the same time, economists such as Laffer revived Say's supply-side theory, opposing Keynes' demand management and advocating classical economics' supply management, arguing that the government should reduce taxes and deficit spending to leverage market forces.
In the 1980s, rational expectations theorists led by Lucas formed their own school of thought, absorbing ideas from monetarism and supply-side economics, separating from the monetarist school (neoclassical macroeconomics), and forming today's neoclassical macroeconomics, which competes with the new Keynesian school.
Today, the debate between New Keynesian economics and New Classical macroeconomics not only determines the direction of mainstream Western economics, but also influences the economic policy-making of developed countries and the relevant policies of developing countries to a certain extent.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
12\. The New Institutional School (1937–present)
The Neoclassical School is the successor to the Classical School, the New Austrian School is the successor to the Austrian School, and the New Keynesian School is the successor to the Keynesian School.
The New Institutional School is...
No, no, no.
No, no, no.
The institutional school is a critic of the neoclassical school, while the new institutional school is the successor to the neoclassical school and is deeply influenced by the Keynesian school.
When this school of thought first emerged, it was not yet known as the "new institutional economics." It was not until 1975, when Oliver Williamson published Capitalist Economy, that it was officially named.
It began with Coase, whose seminal work, "The Nature of the Firm," is his key publication, primarily discussing the concept of transaction costs. The emergence of "transaction costs" was a correction to the perfect price system in neoclassical economics. Later, Williamson established transaction cost economics based on this concept.
It retained the three basic elements of neoclassical economics: preference for stability, rational choice model, and equilibrium analysis method. On this basis, it also introduced new variables such as information, transaction costs, property rights constraints, and government intervention. Later, "transaction costs" and "property rights" became its core content. Demsetz and Alchian, among others, developed the "property rights" theory based on Coase's work.
Unlike institutionalists, they do not hope to complete the "identify problem-solve problem" cycle by exposing the various contradictions of capitalism. Instead, they hope to explain the role of institutions in social development through research on institutions and their generative mechanisms, thereby discovering better paths for social development.
Cross-reading:
1\. Key economists
2\. Key economic works
02 Potential key schools of thought/research prospects for the future
After more than 500 years of criticism and development of economic theory by the above-mentioned key schools, the current mainstream economic theory framework is now very well established.
Macroeconomics and microeconomics have become timeless classics and mainstream concepts that cannot be ignored.
The theory of marginal utility has completely replaced Smith's labor theory of value, becoming the mainstream theory and promising research direction in modern economics.
Faced with the limitations of subsequent developments in economics, economists began to explore two directions:
The first direction is to continue deepening the research direction of the school. For example, the new institutional school continues to study institutions and their formation mechanisms in depth, explaining the role of institutions in social development. Representative figures include Daron Acemoglu.
The second direction is to integrate with more and more disciplines, such as psychology and geography, thereby forming new branches, such as behavioral economics and new economic geography. At the same time, they have also begun to introduce research methods from disciplines such as computer science and psychology into economics, giving rise to experimental economics.
Among them, behavioral economics is a discipline that combines economics and psychology, mainly answering why people make irrational decisions.
Its development was significantly catalyzed by the decline of behaviorism in psychology and the emergence of cognitive psychology.
In the 1960s, cognitive psychology began to reveal more about the brain as an information processing device. They emphasized that mental processes greatly aid our understanding of tasks such as decision making, perception, attention, memory, and problem solving. Some cognitive psychologists naturally turned their attention to testing neoclassical framework models. These developments prompted economists to reconsider how psychology could be applied to economic models and theories. Behavioral economics was born.
In this field, there are two most important cognitive psychologists: Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. Their work in the 1970s provided the initial impetus for modern behavioral economics. Together with Richard Thaler, they were among the first modern behavioral economists.
The emergence of new economic geography stems from economists' focus on space and regions. Led by mainstream economists such as Paul Krugman, they reexamined spatial factors, integrated regional economics and urban economics, which study spatial economic phenomena, and incorporated them into mainstream economic research.
Experimental economics is a discipline that obtains relevant data by controlling experimental conditions and the behavior of subjects, and then organizes and analyzes the experimental data to test, compare, and improve existing economic theories and their underlying assumptions.
Of course, it can also be used to assist in selection and decision-making.
Experimental economics is generally considered to have begun with Edward Chamberlin's 1948 experiment on supply and demand in a classroom at Harvard University. Later, his student Vernon Smith wrote a paper based on experiments in 1962 and published it in the Journal of Political Economy, one of the top economics journals, which established the status of experimental economics in mainstream economics.
Later on, more and more economists, influenced by Smith, developed experimental economics.
Among them are geniuses such as Herbert Simon, who has made tremendous achievements in the fields of artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology, and economics.
Based on the results of game theory experiments, he analyzed the differences between substantive rationality and procedural rationality and published "The Bounded Rationality Model" in 1982. Since then, "bounded rationality" has become a core research topic in behavioral economics.
After the 1990s, with the help of computers, experimental economics was integrated into more branches of economics, such as public economics and information economics.
As a result, economics has also produced more output.
03 Discussion of the above conclusions
In the context of multidisciplinary integration, new schools of economics are bound to emerge.
It's just that... I have no idea what they call themselves.
However, there are three naming conventions that are most likely to be used: naming after a person, such as the Keynesian school; naming after a region, such as the Austrian school and the Chicago school; or naming after the object of study, such as mercantilism and institutionalism.
The fields most likely to emerge from the new economics school are behavioral economics, new economic geography, and experimental economics.
Why?
Using scientific measurement tools, I analyzed more than 20,000 documents published in the American Economic Review since its inception until 2023.
From 1970 to 2023, a large number of terms such as "program," "model," and "empirical" appeared in the literature. Behind these keywords lies behavioral economics, which is the fusion of cognitive psychology and economics; experimental economics, which is the fusion of experimental psychology, computer science, and economics; and the core themes that have been widely discussed and explored in the economics community.
When a group of people discuss similar topics, consensus and criticism will gradually emerge, and the emergence of new schools of thought is only a matter of time.
The new school may exist in the field of new economic geography, partly because this field is sufficiently new, and partly because they are the first to incorporate "space" as a key variable into the framework of economics.
This operation reminds me of Mises of the Austrian School. It was he who first incorporated "time" as a key variable into the framework of economics, forming part of the uniqueness of the Austrian School.
Ref:
1\. Mankiw, N. (2020). Principles of Economics (8th ed.). Beijing University Press.
2\. Sangit Dami. (2023). Introduction to Behavioral Economics (Translated by Li Jingquan). Shanghai People's Publishing House.
3\. Stanley L. Brunn & Randy R. Grant. (2014). History of Economic Thought. Peking University Press.
4\. Wei Lili (ed.). (2023). History of Economic Thought. Mechanical Industry Press.
5\. What arbitrage opportunities are there in the top economics journals of the past century?