Most historians of economics so far have regarded the history of macroeconomics as a process of rivalry among schools or paradigms. In the usual approach, they have attempted to describe it by establishing clear differences between one school and another. A commonly accepted view of history, therefore, is the story of the Keynesian revolution and the anti-Keynesian counter-revolution. We now understand, however, that this familiar approach cannot completely account for the heterogeneity in American Keynesian and the divergence in neoclassical macroeconomics.
This paper proposes an alternative view of the history of macroeconomics. Keynes did not create the field of macroeconomic theory; he simply transformed the structural emphases of a field of study that had existed since before his arrival as an economist. Keynes overemphasized short-term fluctuations of economy or business cycles, and that accidental event in the history of the field had the effect of separating two viewpoints and macroeconomists swung heavily to one side.
The apparently lost viewpoint of growth, however, was revived beneath the surface of the cycle view, gathering steam and then giving birth first to the neoclassical theory of growth and soon thereafter to the optimal growth theory. Following a period of ferment and confusion, what is called real-business cycle theory integrated the two viewpoints. Their reintegration was not simply a return to the old framework but was part of the serious process being undertaken by researchers endeavoring to build optimal dynamic models more completely.
In the minds of macroeconomists, the conflict among schools is now a thing of the past. In this paper I argue that we historians of economics must also change our perspec tive as we describe our histories of macroeconomics. Our thinking should be oriented toward integration and fusion instead of divergence and alternation.

抄録全体を表示

　本稿では，中小企業経営者が自社の管理会計実践に対して抱いている認識について検討する。先行研究では，自らは管理会計を実施していないと認識していながらも自社の財務的業績の推移を確認している中小企業経営者が一定数存在していることが明らかにされている（朝原 2010）。本稿ではこれを受けて，飲食企業4 事例のケース・スタディにより，経営者が認識していないにもかかわらず管理会計が実践されている可能性を考察したい。そして，経営者自身が会計プロセスの一部分しか担っていない場合には，経営者が自社において管理会計を実践していることを認識しない場合があることを示す。そのうえで，中小企業における管理会計の実態をより正確に理解するためには，会計情報の生成・ 利用プロセスにとどまらず，企業活動の管理のための情報の生成・利用プロセスというより広範な観点からの調査が必要と考えられることを論じる。

抄録全体を表示