The conceptualization of capital and the nakedness of neoclassical theory

This research shows that in the last twenty to thirty years, capital in neoclassical theory has been conceptualized in a voluntaristic and selfreferential way. This has served to define incongruous policies and recommendations in developing countries. By looking at the conceptualizations of capital that emerged in neoclassical theory after the Cambridge controversies and focusing on two crucial topics to development studies within that paradigm: economic growth theory and comparative advantage theory, this research gives a recount of the ambiguous and voluntaristic conceptualizations that have been made in theory and policy related literature. It concludes that the lack of a sound conceptualization of capital evidences the instability of the neoclassical school, which should open the possibility to redefine economic policies in development studies.