000028410 001__ 28410
000028410 005__ 20180122203639.0
000028410 037__ $$a1858-2016-152857
000028410 041__ $$aen
000028410 084__ $$aO11
000028410 245__ $$aArthur Lewis' Contribution to Development Thinking and Policy
000028410 260__ $$c2004
000028410 269__ $$a2004
000028410 300__ $$a20
000028410 336__ $$aWorking or Discussion Paper
000028410 446__ $$aEnglish
000028410 490__ $$aCenter Discussion Paper No. 891
000028410 520__ $$aArthur Lewis’ seminal 1954 paper and its emphasis on dualism appeared at a time when neither the work of Keynes or Harrod-Domar nor the later neoclassical production function of Solow seemed relevant for developing countries. As a consequence, his model, rooted in the classical tradition, plus its many extensions, generated an extensive literature at the center of development theory. The approach also encountered increasingly strong criticism, some of the “red herring” variety, but some, spearheaded by neoclassical microeconomists like Rosenzweig, also raised serious challenges, focused especially on its labor market assumptions. This paper reviews this landscape and asks what theoretical or policy relevance the Lewis model retains for today’s developing countries.
000028410 650__ $$aInternational Development
000028410 6531_ $$adevelopment theory
000028410 6531_ $$adualism
000028410 6531_ $$alabor markets
000028410 700__ $$aRanis, Gustav
000028410 8564_ $$s54718$$uhttps://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/28410/files/dp040891.pdf
000028410 887__ $$ahttp://purl.umn.edu/28410
000028410 909CO $$ooai:ageconsearch.umn.edu:28410$$pGLOBAL_SET
000028410 912__ $$nMade available in DSpace on 2007-03-07T17:46:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
dp040891.pdf: 54718 bytes, checksum: 19e73987b3755e3180bf4691573fd731 (MD5)
  Previous issue date: 2004
000028410 982__ $$gYale University>Economic Growth Center>Center Discussion Papers
000028410 980__ $$a1858