Review of Economics and Economic Methodology

Open calls for papers · Journal events

The Review of Economics and Economic Methodology exists to give heterodox economic scholarship a serious, peer-reviewed home. Rather than treating one school of thought as settled truth, the journal welcomes work that interrogates the assumptions beneath economic models and asks what those assumptions leave out. Its pages bring together economic theory, methodology, the history of economic thought and questions of ethics, treating these as connected rather than separate concerns. Readers who arrive looking for careful argument rather than quick conclusions will find a publication shaped by editorial review and a commitment to pluralism in method and perspective.

Methodology sits at the center of the journal's identity, because the way economists build and defend their models shapes what they can see. Papers in this tradition ask how concepts such as equilibrium, marginal productivity or rational choice are constructed, and what happens when those constructions are applied to complex real economies. A methodological lens does not dismiss formal reasoning; it asks formal reasoning to be transparent about its scope and limits. This kind of scrutiny helps researchers avoid conceptual errors that quietly travel from abstract models into policy advice, and it keeps theoretical debates honest about their own foundations.

The history of economic thought offers a long memory that contemporary economics often lacks. Revisiting figures such as Ricardo, Marx or Keynes is not antiquarian nostalgia but a way to understand how today's debates inherited their vocabulary and their blind spots. Earlier writers wrestled with questions of value, capital, distribution and crisis that remain unresolved, and their arguments can reframe present-day problems in productive ways. By publishing historical and interpretive work alongside formal and empirical papers, the journal keeps a conversation going across generations of economic thinking rather than treating the past as superseded.

Inequality, labor and the distribution of wealth recur throughout the journal's coverage because they sit where theory meets lived experience. How income and property are distributed is not a technical afterthought but a central question about how economies actually function. Contributions in this area examine the institutions, power relations and market structures that shape who gains and who bears risk, and they consider how quantitative evidence can illuminate patterns that aggregate statistics obscure. The aim is understanding rather than advocacy, though the questions raised often carry clear social weight and invite readers to think carefully about fairness and solidarity.

Crises have a way of exposing the limits of established macroeconomics, and the journal takes that exposure seriously. When familiar frameworks fail to anticipate financial instability or to explain persistent stagnation, the response should be more than patching a model at the edges. Papers in this vein explore how macroeconomic thinking might be rebuilt to account for uncertainty, conflict and the institutions through which economies are governed. The journal's interest in crisis is not only retrospective; it is a forward-looking effort to ask what a more robust and relevant macroeconomics would need to look like.

Pluralism is more than a slogan here; it is a working editorial principle. A pluralist journal makes room for competing theoretical traditions, for qualitative and quantitative methods, and for approaches that combine formal modeling with historical and institutional analysis. This does not mean lowering standards, since every contribution still passes through editorial review before publication. It means widening the range of questions considered legitimate and the range of tools considered appropriate. The result is a publication where a Marxian analysis, a mainstream critique and an institutional study can sit side by side and speak to one another.

Economics is not sealed off from culture, politics or society, and the journal's scope reflects that conviction. Questions of trade, foreign investment, corporate power and international agreements are treated as social and political phenomena as much as technical ones. Contributors examine how institutions and ideas travel across borders and how agreements and reforms reshape the room for democratic choice. This broader view resists the tendency to reduce complex social relations to a single measurable variable, and it asks readers to consider the cultural and political context in which economic decisions are made and contested.

For researchers, the journal offers a venue where methodological reflection is valued rather than treated as a distraction from results. Authors are invited to be explicit about their assumptions, their evidence and the boundaries of their claims, which makes for papers that are useful to readers well beyond a narrow specialty. Calls for submissions and special issues create space for sustained attention to particular themes, from the mechanics of growth to the choreography of financial markets. Submissions are welcomed from scholars who want their work read by an audience that cares about how arguments are built, not only about what they conclude.

Teaching and academic community matter to the journal's mission, since pluralism in research depends on pluralism in the classroom and in scholarly conversation. The publication is associated with a movement for economic pluralism rooted in a university setting, and that origin shapes its interest in how economics is taught, debated and passed on. Papers that reflect on pedagogy, on the relation between theory and evidence, or on the role of the economist in public life find a natural home here. The journal thus serves not only as an archive of finished research but as part of an ongoing intellectual community.

Reading the journal, one notices a consistent commitment to relevance without sacrificing rigor. Contributors are encouraged to connect theoretical work to questions that matter outside the seminar room, whether those concern growth, innovation, finance or the organization of production. At the same time, the editorial process insists that relevance cannot substitute for careful argument and clear evidence. This balance gives the publication its character: it is a place where ambitious theoretical and methodological work is taken seriously, where controversies are aired rather than smoothed over, and where the quest to understand the economy is treated as a genuinely open and collective project.