[LudwigNagasena]

Right, but are there _actual_ contributions to economics or the history of economics that were consequences of his “stimulation”?

Also, saying that he single-handedly prompted “economists and historians alike to incorporate broader socio-cultural understandings into their analyses” is a huge denigration of institutional economics, behavioural economics, Austrian economics, social economics, etc.

[weatherlight]

It's a relatively recent addition to the discorse, having been published just over a decade ago.

It's definitely apart of the heterodox tradition in economics (without diminishing what's already there), which often takes longer to be integrated into the mainstream.

So, I guess time will tell?

[LudwigNagasena]

I would even take any contribution to heterodox economics. But what was actually contributed?

[weatherlight]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_anthropology#Barter