Microeconomics

(redirected from Microeconomic theory)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Encyclopedia.

Microeconomics

Analysis of the behavior of individual economic units such as companies, industries, or households.

Microeconomics

The study of the behavior of individuals, companies, and industries. That is, macroeconomics studies economic decisions at the individual and small unit level. It does not look at the function of larger data sets like GDP or national debt. It is useful in helping determine what motivates individual buyers and sellers to do what they do. See also: Macroeconomics, Bottom-up investing.

microeconomics

the branch of economics concerned with the study of the behaviour of CONSUMERS and FIRMS and the determination of the market prices and quantities transacted of FACTOR INPUTS and GOODS and SERVICES. Microeconomic analysis investigates how scarce economic resources are allocated between alternative ends and seeks to identify the strategic determinants of an optimally efficient use of resources. See also THEORY OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR, THEORY OF THE FIRM, THEORY OF MARKETS, THEORY OF DEMAND, THEORY OF SUPPLY, MACROECONOMICS.
References in periodicals archive ?
However, this does not mean formulating the postulate of eliminating the idea of instrumental rationality taken from the microeconomic theory of the firm.
And over the course of the twentieth century, neoclassical microeconomic theory, the hard core of neoclassical theory as a whole, had become increasingly interwoven with advanced mathematics and the latter's requirement of a high level of formal integration.
But when two campus police officers, one working for the FBI, paid him a visit on the afternoon of October 24, they weren't interested in discussing his microeconomic theory.
First, in Part III, I seek a clearer understanding of the multiple uses of the concept within microeconomic theory.
As a microeconomic theory of production-distribution, the theory of productiveness implies that it is important who owns productive property if property is capable of producing an ever-greater relative proportion of "consumer-useful" products.
Inferences are drawn using both microeconomic theory and historical parallels found in the market for graduate education.
While too unsystematic to be useful as case studies, these stories of individual human experience, when read together with Yunus' sketches of modified assumptions of microeconomic theory (to take into account non-material incentives and disincentives), make for interesting and inspiring reading.
In 1946, Friedman succeeded Viner in teaching microeconomic theory at Chicago.
It seems evident to me that we need to seek a non-explanatory rationale for the continuing commitment of economists to neoclassical microeconomic theory.
Unfortunately, this blind-spot has prompted him to ignore or downplay some troublesome aspects of microeconomic theory and public entrepreneurship that are widely recognized in the scholarly literature.
By failing to make economics seem even slightly relevant, most of the knowledge I picked up was limited to study of the now-discredited Philips curve, convoluted flow diagrams explaining how Government spending and tax interrelated, and the excitingworl d of microeconomic theory.
Ayres cleared the way for his theories of institutional economics by completely rejecting not only orthodox microeconomic theory, but also the entire classical tradition in the history of economics.