PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Missemer, Antoine
AU  - Pottier, Antonin
TI  - Revisiting Land, Labor, and Capital in Neoclassical Economics
AID  - 10.3368/le.101.4.021225-0009
DP  - 2025 Oct 01
TA  - Land Economics
PG  - 566--584
VI  - 101
IP  - 4
4099  - http://le.uwpress.org/content/101/4/566.short
4100  - http://le.uwpress.org/content/101/4/566.full
AB  - It is usually argued that the advent of neoclassical economics led to the consideration of only two factors of production (capital and labor) instead of three (capital, labor, and land). From the 1880s to the 1920s, land and natural resources would have been marginalized and left to applied fields such as land economics. This article revisits this episode. Theoretically, it shows that there was no requirement in marginal productivity theories to subsume land into capital. Historically, it demonstrates that alternatives did exist within U.S. neoclassicism to the neglect of land and natural resources, providing inspiration for today’s research.