ABSTRACT
The paper evaluates the assumption of a homogeneous theory of monetary stabilization in early Latin American structuralist economics. Starting in the 1950s, the growing and continuous inflationary problem in the region was seen as a result of bottlenecks within the productive structure. However, the channels that transmit such imbalances onto prices are framed quite distinctly amongst the aforementioned writers, with implications regarding their policy suggestions. The paper underlines a methodological flexibility, which engendered a fragmented theoretical framework of analysis, and the notion that inflation was part of the process of economic development. The combination of both elements unveiled an analytical deficiency within ecla’s theory of monetary stabilization. As a result, there arose a tension between Prebisch’s Anglo-Saxon Keynesian view and the original theory proposed by Noyola and Furtado. The paper traces the nature of such disparities and the extent to which they impaired the constitution of a unique theoretical corpus on matters of stabilization.
KEYWORDS:
Latin American structuralism; structural inflation; monetary stabilization; ECLA; methodological heterogeneity