| This dissertation traces the roots of disequilibrium theory in earlier economic thought. It is concerned with both characterizing the essence of disequilibrium theory, and resolving the question of whether certain earlier schools of thought should or should not be credited with making fundamental contributions to the development of that theory.;Part II examines the Underconsumptionist, Institutionalist, German Historical and Austrian Schools of thought, because all of them were concerned with certain aspects of disequilibrium phenomena.;It is concluded that the Austrian School should be credited with making fundamental contributions to the development of disequilibrium theory, in that, the Austrian School addressed either implicitly or explicitly all nine of the key elements of disequilibrium theory. Furthermore, although none of the four schools examined gave specific guidance on the mathematical modeling of disequilibrium states, all of them did serve to make it known that to deviate from historical time was to abandon an absolutely essential element of relevant economic theorizing.;Part I traces the evolution of disequilibrium theory over the past several decades by examining the development of models of temporary competitive equilibrium (with and without quantity rationing) from their Neo-classical origins. The following key elements of disequilibrium theory are identified and examined, and serve as a frame of reference against which the works of earlier schools of thought are compared: (1) An explicit modeling of disequilibrium states; (2) A recognition of a new concept of equilibrium; (3) Microeconomic modeling of effective demand and supply; (4) An emphasis on historical time; (5) An explicit modeling of uncertainty; (6) A recognition of imperfect information; (7) An abandonment of all encompassing grand equilibrium theory: attention to selective approaches; (8) Recognition of institutional elements; and (9) An emphasis of 'rules of thumb' rather than conventional optimality. |
