Print

Print


Dear All,

I am working on revisions to my Contending Perspectives in Econ book and
one chapter that I originally intended to write was on ecological economics
or econ of sustainability. The existing chapters cover Neoclassicism,
Marxism, Austrianism, Post Keynesianism, Institutionalism, New
Institutionalism, and Feminism.

Do you consider ecological econ/sustainability a school of thought , per se
along the lines of those others or is it a topic area?

Similarly, I have a colleague who uses my book and she's very keen that I
add a Public Choice chapter. Same question: school of thought or subject
area?

Incidentally, she is an Austrian and yet there is no one in the department
whose overall philosophy regarding pedagogy and curriculum matches mine
more completely. She's a wonderful person. Who would have thought?!

John

--
John T. Harvey
Professor of Economics
Texas Christian University <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.econ.tcu.edu_&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=y6g8JvZbQh_hufHY2Nzx9GbQuiZI-8nDyMEKBzMDJ0A&e=>

<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Contending-2DPerspectives-2DEconomics-2DContemporary-2DSchools_dp_0857932039_&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=8ZuCOEbgE0pK5qlE0KVd--9CYLJkMV5c09qkEfNHtF4&e=>

<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Currencies-2DCapital-2DFlows-2DCrises-2Ddetermination_dp_0415781205_&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=rKzaMr68Z988BHACWtWZDD5Bthj9jHleKGsN661YKfA&e=>

<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Directions-2DHeterodox-2DEconomics-2DAdvances-2D2008-2D02-2D20_dp_B01FIZW0G8_ref-3Dasap-5Fbc-3Fie-3DUTF8&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=c0vruZERn63l2OMS-sO-YRVXm6A0OPOQdr19U9ElkW8&e=>

<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amazon.com_Foundations-2DInternational-2DEconomics-2DPost-2DKeynesian-2DPerspectives_dp_0415146518_ref-3Dasap-5Fbc-3Fie-3DUTF8&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=AFNLQPWIHU8EHvxP0u88owhC6bM0p2Spz08EV7c4UIU&e=>

www.CowboyEconomist.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cowboyeconomist.com_&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=xmAn3EQDO_SqwZ9McxAGIv_cavWfSGZEckRDBBCl5TQ&e=>

Forbes.com Blog <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.forbes.com_sites_johntharvey_&d=DwIBaQ&c=Cu5g146wZdoqVuKpTNsYHeFX_rg6kWhlkLF8Eft-wwo&r=LtbujWNPdbzw6j8eq9-RJVMBctp9ndCoqGEy57VsNLQ&m=o3RUAKYABOhIoL9srCpfVjuXOp6xKbo1b_cIAXzdAw4&s=w7QFrnIla6QYOD828LGMNL8YM5L3ziLozG-4zEawZjc&e=>