Macroeconomics in Context

by Neva R. Goodwin, Julie Nelson, Jonathan Harris

Designed for a single-semester undergraduate course, this introductory economics textbook updates traditional macroeconomics to encompass twenty-first century concerns. In contrast to standard texts, the book starts with the question of human well-being, and then examines how economic activities can contribute to or detract from it."Macroeconomics in Context" covers standard macroeconomic concepts and models, and shows how they apply to such critical issues as ecological sustainability, distributional equity, the quality of employment, and the adequacy of living standards. In language that is clear and compelling, the book's discussions of historical, institutional, political, and social factors encourage students to engage with the subject matter. An Instructor's Resource Manual, a Test Bank, and a Student Study Guide are available online to instructors who adopt the text.

Genres: Economics

464 pages, Paperback

First published January 21, 2003

Reviews

[Justin · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best introductions to the concepts and principles of economics available. Authors take special care in relating the graphs and abstract ideas into real world situations. Sections are devoted to explaining a principle and then explaining how that principle can be seen/implemented in an actual society. Special care is taken in explaining resource and capital efficiency. I read it to learn Microeconomics before I took Energy and Environmental Economics next semester (without the required prerequisite of Microecon... the professor recommended that I read this book to catch up)

[Cain S. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Light on mathematics, and with a more than subtle leftist bias. Good lay exposition if you haven't read any economics texts at the graduate and researcher level.

[Gabriela · Rating 2 out of 5]

Intro to microeconomics course. Some of the stuff I could understand, the majority of it went right over my head. Their explanation on formulas used by economists could have been better.