When Hicks Recanted IS-LM

The famous paper where Hicks is generally taken to have recanted IS-LM and admitted its failings was published in the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics in 1981:

Hicks, John. 1980–1981. “‘IS-LM’: An Explanation,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 3.2: 139–154.

The paper also inspired a minor symposium in the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics Spring edition in 1982, with commentary on Hicks’ paper by a number of Post Keynesians:

Shackle, G. L. S. 1982. “Sir John Hicks’ ‘IS-LM: An Explanation’: A Comment,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 435–438.

Chick, Victoria. 1982. “A Comment on ‘IS-LM: An Explanation,’” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 439–444.

Weintraub, Sidney. 1982. “Hicks on ‘IS-LM: More Explanation’?,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 445–453.

All welcomed Hicks’ paper, although Shackle (1982: 438) argued that Hicks still appeared to cling to a notion of equilibrium in his paper that was questionable.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chick, Victoria. 1982. “A Comment on ‘IS-LM: An Explanation,’” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 439–444.

Hicks, John. 1980–1981. “‘IS-LM’: An Explanation,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 3.2: 139–154.

King, J. E. 2002. A History of Post Keynesian Economics since 1936. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA.

Shackle, G. L. S. 1982. “Sir John Hicks’ ‘IS-LM: An Explanation’: A Comment,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 435–438.

Weintraub, Sidney. 1982. “Hicks on ‘IS-LM: More Explanation’?,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 4.3: 445–453.