What drives the rise and fall of economic activity over time? Why do expansions end, and why do some downturns hit harder than others? These questions lie at the heart of theories of the business cycle. Economists have long debated the causes behind the fluctuations in economic growth. This article offers a concise overview of five major schools of thought that explain the origins and dynamics of the business cycle.

1. Neoclassical Economists

Neoclassical economists emphasize that technological change is the primary engine of economic growth. When technological advancements occur rapidly, they believe these drive the expansion phase of the business cycle.

A key assumption of this school is that consumers and workers behave rationally. Neoclassical thinkers argue that unemployment is generally involuntary—most people want to work and earn wages. Therefore, if someone is unemployed, it’s typically due to circumstances beyond their control.

Another cornerstone of neoclassical thought is Say’s Law, which states that supply creates its own demand. In other words, everything produced will eventually be sold and consumed. Neoclassical economists strongly believe in free markets and the economy’s ability to self-correct—a view that significantly shapes their theories of the business cycle.  

Neoclassical economists view fluctuations away from long-term equilibrium as temporary. As a result, when faced with a downturn, they recommend allowing wages and prices to adjust naturally. In their view, government intervention is unnecessary for restoring full employment or long-term balance.

2. Austrian School

The Austrian school—with influential figures like Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Hayek, and Joseph Schumpeter—centers its theory of economic growth around the concept of creative destruction. This idea suggests that innovation—whether through new technologies or products—drives progress by offering greater returns to investors and better value to consumers. But it can also displace existing firms that fail to adapt, reshaping entire industries.

Austrian economists argue that business cycles are primarily the result of misguided government intervention and an excessive expansion of the money supply. When governments attempt to stimulate economic growth and reduce unemployment, they often lower interest rates. While this may boost investment in the short term, it can also lead to overinvestment and an inflationary gap—creating an unsustainable boom that ultimately ends in a bust.

Austrian thinkers—committed to free-market principles—advocate minimal government economic interference. Their theories of the business cycle highlight how artificially suppressing interest rates can distort natural market signals and ultimately lead to long-term economic instability.

3. Keynesian School

Founded by British economist John Maynard Keynes in the first half of the 20th century, the Keynesian school challenges the belief in a fully self-regulating free market. Unlike Neoclassical and Austrian economists, Keynesians argue that shifts in the business cycle are primarily driven by changes in total demand—often triggered by shifts in expectations about the economy’s future.

For example, when people anticipate an economic downturn, overall demand falls. This reduction leads to lower output and declining price levels, pushing the economy below its long-run full-employment equilibrium. As a result, unemployment rises, and wages begin to fall.

The situation worsens when wages become “sticky”—meaning they are slow to adjust downward. Workers resist lower pay, which deepens pessimism and prolongs the downturn. In such cases, the economy can spiral into a deeper recession or even depression without any automatic mechanism to restore balance.

Keynesians argue that government intervention is essential during such periods. They advocate active fiscal and monetary policies to restore economic stability and boost demand, such as increasing government spending or expanding the money supply. Unlike Neoclassical economists, Keynesians reject the idea that the market can correct itself efficiently and believe that strong policy responses are necessary to guide the economy back to full employment.

4. Monetarism School of Thought

Monetarism—notably represented by Nobel laureate Milton Friedman—offers a distinct perspective on the theories of the business cycle and the causes of business cycle fluctuations. Unlike Keynesians, monetarists argue that changes in the money supply are the primary driver of economic cycles. They believe controlling the money supply is the key to maintaining economic stability.

Central to monetarist thinking is the belief that the economy functions best when the money supply grows steadily and moderately. Sudden increases or decreases in the money supply can disrupt this balance. While Keynesians may advocate increasing the money supply during a crisis, monetarists caution that such actions can fuel unsustainable booms and deepen long-term instability.

For this reason, monetarists support a limited role for the government in managing the economy. They emphasize the importance of consistent, predictable monetary and fiscal policies. They argue that uncertainty about how the government might respond in a crisis only adds to economic volatility.

5. New Classical School

Rooted in the principles of classical economics, the New Classical school focuses on the rational, utility-maximizing behavior of individuals. While its name may sound like the Neoclassical school, the two differ significantly, especially in their views on unemployment.

Neoclassical economists generally argue that unemployment is involuntary, caused by market conditions beyond individuals’ control. In contrast, New Classical economists, through their theories of the business cycle, believe that unemployment is voluntary. They suggest that individuals may choose not to work if they derive greater utility from leisure than employment.

At the core of New Classical thought is the belief that economic agents (individuals and firms) respond rationally to economic changes. This school developed the Real Business Cycle (RBC) theory, which asserts that recessions and expansions are natural, efficient responses to external economic shocks—not failures that require government correction.

According to this view, traditional countercyclical policies—like offering low-interest loans to stimulate investment during downturns—can do more harm than good. If firms anticipate preferential treatment only during recessions, they may delay investment until such policies are introduced, reinforcing economic slowdowns.

New Classical economists argue that government interventions often distort market signals and can intensify business cycle fluctuations. They advocate for minimal interference, believing that the economy is best left to adjust independently.

Theories of the Business Cycle: Competing Views

These five major schools of thought offer contrasting theories of the business cycle—each with distinct views on what drives economic fluctuations and how governments should respond. Neoclassical economists highlight technological change and market self-correction, while Keynesians emphasize the need for government action to manage demand. The Austrian and New Classical schools argue against intervention, viewing downturns as natural or necessary corrections. Monetarists focus on controlling the money supply to maintain stability. These differing perspectives reflect the ongoing debate over the causes of economic fluctuations and the best path to recovery.

To deepen your understanding of economic theory and explore its real-world applications, consider joining the 365 Financial Analyst platform and advancing your skills through expert-led courses and resources.

FREE SIGN UP