This essay analyzes the late development of the Stockholm School, that is, the progress after the founding years of 1927–37, which have been dealt with in my work The Stockholm School and the Development of Dynamic Method (Hansson, 1982). That work defined the Stockholm School by the interrelated development of different dynamic methods among its members, and this process was, for the period 1927–37, an internal Swedish affair.

The analysis of the development after 1937 is still concentrated on contributions that deal with the dynamic method, but these contributions are no longer isolated from foreign influences. It is therefore not possible to speak of a school in the same strict sense as for the initial period. This paper includes contributions that relate to the ideas of the Stockholm School. However, the works must contain something original concerning the dynamic method. Hence, I look at a sequel to the Stockholm School from this limited point of view, and it is not at all excluded that the School might have had an important influence in other areas. Both Bertil Ohlin and Erik Lundberg, for example, wrote long tracts on economic policy that are obviously based on the old approach.