This paper aims to review the undergraduate curricular structure of 36 self‐identified heterodox economic programs in the USA, Australia, UK and Canada.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to review the undergraduate curricular structure of 36 self‐identified heterodox economic programs in the USA, Australia, UK and Canada.
Design/methodology/approach
The author gathers, summarizes, compares and contrasts the structure of 36 undergraduate heterodox departments. Departments are classified into traditional, plausibly pluralistic, and demonstrably heterodox programs. Specific examples illustrate each classification.
Findings
With notable exceptions described here, most heterodox economics programs are structured as traditional mainstream departments with a few pluralist or political economy electives available. However, 20 departments exist that require at least one heterodox course; eight require two or more.
Practical implications
A few programs have created imitable curricular structures that one would expect to significantly influence the depth and breadth of heterodox perspectives presented in the undergraduate economics major.
Originality/value
This is the first published analysis of undergraduate heterodox economics curricula. It highlights the creative structures characterizing some of the English‐speaking world's best programs and demonstrates that the curricula in most programs lack required courses in heterodox economics. The paper also provides examples of intentionally heterodox programs that may serve as models for others to emulate.
Details
Keywords
Tae‐Hee Jo, Lynne Chester and Mary C. King
The purpose of this article is to introduce heterodox economics as a viable alternative to market‐fundamentalist economics and to outline the articles of the special issue.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this article is to introduce heterodox economics as a viable alternative to market‐fundamentalist economics and to outline the articles of the special issue.
Design/methodology/approach
This introductory article provides an overview and summary of the contributions in the special issue.
Findings
Market‐fundamentalist economics has failed to adequately explain the economy or to provide guidance to policymakers that lead to widely‐shared prosperity and human well‐being. By contrast, heterodox economics offers social and historical narratives of both market and non‐market activities.
Originality/value
The article helps general readers to get acquainted with visions and approaches that are alternative to market‐fundamentalist economics. This will allow them to imagine more concretely that a better world is possible.