The mutual influence between the Stockholm School and Ragnar Frisch of Oslo was, as is evident from Andvig's paper, very limited. The Stockholm School may be described as a group of Swedish economists who, between 1927 and 1937, worked together to develop a dynamic method, a development that was, once under way, almost completely isolated from outside influences (Hansson, 1982). Frisch, on the other side, was obviously very interested in and well acquainted with the ideas and thoughts of the Stockholm School. He lectured on Lindahl and Myrdal in the mid-1930s, and he considered, as did most members of the Stockholm School, Wicksell his most important teacher. However, he as a rule opposed the Stockholm School's ideas.

Andvig's paper gives an illuminative and fairly detailed account of Frisch's view of the writings of the Stockholm School. I shall limit my comments on it to giving, partly as a supplement to Andvig's exposition, a brief perspective of the differences in methods and outlook between Frisch and the Stockholm School that I find particularly interesting.