This book examines the historical and methodological development of the consumption function in economics. It provides a discussion of the key stages in the theoretical evolution of the concept, from the beginning of the 20th century through to the modern day. Particular attention is given to the ways in which Thorstein Veblen, John Maynard Keynes, James Duesenberry, Franco Modigliani, Richard Brumberg, and Milton Friedman conceptualized consumption. Further, it examines the latest theoretical and methodological developments within the neoclassical, as well as the heterodox economics traditions. By connecting the history of consumption function to the methodological frameworks in which consumption theories were devised, the work also brings into the fore the important economic policy implications associated to various consumption formulations.  This book offers insight into how different schools of economic thought have defined consumption and how these ideas inform modern economic theories and political discussions. It will be of interest to students and researchers working on macroeconomic policy, economic theory, and the history of economic thought. 

Ideas concerning the role, function, and nature of labor unions and their leadership can be found in 19th century economics literature. Even since this early period, a division between orthodox and non-orthodox approaches toward the study of labor unions can be discerned.  The orthodox framework was formed in the late 19th century with the gradual establishment of Marginalism, and it consolidated itself with the dominance of early neoclassical economics. Orthodox economic theory did not devote much attention to the economic analysis of unions. On the contrary and during the same period, non-orthodox economists such as Sidney and Beatrice Webb and early institutionalists (e.g. Richard Ely), had paid considerable attention to the study of unions, perceiving them as politico-economic organizations and emphasizing their wider role as social institutions (McNulty, 1980). The legacy of those two approaches continued in the 20th century and contemporary analyses of labor unions. The orthodox approach (originating mainly from the work of John Dunlop), generally conceives unions as purely economic units, analogous to firms, which can be studied by applying the standard tools of microeconomic theory. In this framework, the notion of union leadership plays a minimum role. In contrast, the non-orthodox viewpoint (originating mainly from Arthur Ross’ works), embraces a holistic, institutional-political-based attitude to labor unionism (Kaufman, 2002).