Response to De Vroey

Roger E. Backhouse*, Mauro Boianovsky

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This paper is a response to Michel De Vroey's review of our book, published in this issue of EJHET. Differently from De Vroey's, our aim is to understand the theoretical choices with which economists believed they were confronted at the time. This is reflected in the organisation of our book, the selection of topics (disequilibrium, imperfect competition, etc.), and the conclusions about the fate of disequilibrium macroeconomics.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)743-749
Number of pages7
JournalEuropean Journal of the History of Economic Thought
Issue number4
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 25 Jun 2014


  • Disequilibrium
  • imperfect competition
  • macroeconomics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
  • History and Philosophy of Science


Dive into the research topics of 'Response to De Vroey'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this