Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Towards a political economy of accounting: an empirical illustration of the Cambridge controversies – an update

Towards a political economy of accounting: an empirical illustration of the Cambridge... Since Adam Smith’s ambiguous endorsement of neo-classical thought in his 18th Century Wealth of Nations , mainstream economists have followed his lead, and embraced neo-classical economics or marginalism and ‘forgot’ its forerunner: Classical Economic Theory (sometimes called the Labour Theory of Value). Until recently marginalism has held centre-stage. Things changed however with the Cambridge Controversies and Sraffa’s 1960 critique of marginalism. This 1960 intellectual knockout languished for some 40 years (demonstrating the triumph of ideology of intellectual verity). Fast forward to today’s economic crisis: neo-classicism is in crisis: failing to anticipate and explain market failures, market disequilibrium and the rise of oligopolies and monopolies – exposing the fallacy of competitive market discipline. This paper revives the critiques of marginalism provided by the Cambridge Controversies and illustrates how accounting ideas impact accounting statements using evidence from an empirical study of a Scottish multinational – Delco. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png African Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance Inderscience Publishers

Towards a political economy of accounting: an empirical illustration of the Cambridge controversies – an update

Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/inderscience-publishers/towards-a-political-economy-of-accounting-an-empirical-illustration-of-ZVgkgZSjD4

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Inderscience Publishers
Copyright
Copyright © Inderscience Enterprises Ltd. All rights reserved
ISSN
2046-8083
eISSN
2046-8091
DOI
10.1504/AJAAF.2012.048051
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Since Adam Smith’s ambiguous endorsement of neo-classical thought in his 18th Century Wealth of Nations , mainstream economists have followed his lead, and embraced neo-classical economics or marginalism and ‘forgot’ its forerunner: Classical Economic Theory (sometimes called the Labour Theory of Value). Until recently marginalism has held centre-stage. Things changed however with the Cambridge Controversies and Sraffa’s 1960 critique of marginalism. This 1960 intellectual knockout languished for some 40 years (demonstrating the triumph of ideology of intellectual verity). Fast forward to today’s economic crisis: neo-classicism is in crisis: failing to anticipate and explain market failures, market disequilibrium and the rise of oligopolies and monopolies – exposing the fallacy of competitive market discipline. This paper revives the critiques of marginalism provided by the Cambridge Controversies and illustrates how accounting ideas impact accounting statements using evidence from an empirical study of a Scottish multinational – Delco.

Journal

African Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance – Inderscience Publishers

Published: Jan 1, 2012

There are no references for this article.