Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This book provides a surprising answer to two puzzling questions that relate to the very "soul" of the professional study of economics in the late twentieth century. How did the discipline of economics come to be dominated by an approach that is heavily dependent on mathematically derived models? And what happened to other approaches to the discipline that were considered to be scientifically viable less than fifty years ago? Between the two world wars there were two well-accepted schools of thought in economics: the "neoclassical," which emerged in the last third of the nineteenth century, and the "institutionalist," which started with the works of Veblen and Commons at the end of the same century. Although the contributions of the institutionalists are nearly forgotten now, Yuval Yonay shows that their legacy lingers in the study and practice of economics today. By reconsidering their impact and by analyzing the conflicts that arose between neoclassicists and institutionalists, Yonay brings to life a hidden chapter in the history of economics.The author is a sociologist of science who brings a unique perspective to economic history. By utilizing the actor-network approach of Bruno Latour and Michel Callon, he arrives at a deeper understanding of the nature of the changes that took place in the practice of economics. His analysis also illuminates a broader set of issues concerning the nature of scientific practice and the forces behind changes in scientific knowledge.

Economic schools --- anno 1940-1949 --- anno 1910-1919 --- United States --- Institutional economics --- Neoclassical school of economics --- Economics --- History --- Economics -- United States -- History -- 20th century. --- Institutional economics -- History -- 20th century. --- Neoclassical school of economics -- History -- 20th century. --- Business & Economics --- Economic Theory --- Cambridge school of economics --- Marshallian economics --- Classical school of economics --- Schools of economics --- Institutional economics - History - 20th century. --- Neoclassical school of economics - History - 20th century. --- Economics - United States - History - 20th century. --- United States of America

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Why are Muslim and Arab women less likely to be part of the modern labor force? A popular answer claims that it is the unique cultural and religious heritage of these women that leads them to choose or to follow options other than participating in the labor force. In many Muslim countries legislation is explicitly based on the Shari'a (Islamic law), and "family laws and practices treat women as inferior to men" (Hajjar 2004). Many Muslim countries also deliberately avoid labor laws that ban gender discrimination, do not provide maternity leaves, do not legislate affordable child care, and formally resist the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW; Sonbol 2010; cf. Afkhami and Friedl 1997; Anwar 2009; Sadiqi and Annaji 2011).

Women, Arab --- Muslim women --- Islamic women --- Women, Muslim --- Women --- Arab women --- Employment --- Muslimahs