Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The role of any science is systematically to reduce indeterminacy, and it is on this basis that scientific paradigms are judged. As Kuhn notes, "Paradigms gain their status because they are more successful than their competitors in solving a few problems that the group of practitioners have come to recognize as acute" (p. 23). In the economics profession the neoclassical model based on marginal analysis has gained this status because of its success in reducing indeterminacy. Due to this success, economists interested in natural resources and environmental problems have adopted the neoclassical approach. By no means, however, has the adoption of the neoclassical paradigm eliminated methodological debate or led to conclusions accepted by all members of the profession. As Randall suggests:
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Terry L. Anderson (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: