The aim of the paper is to discuss the distinction between orthodox, or mainstream, and heterodox economics. It contends that it is possible to distinguish between: a closed systems view, based on price-centered coordination of the economy, and; an open systems view whereby coordination involves elements that are not strictly associated to prices. The distinction depends not only on a different theory of economic coordination. It reflects a different view of the world and, consequently, different methodological premises. The very notion of economics turns out to be based on different grounds.

The meaning of orthodox and heterodox terms is open to debate in the literature. The paper, therefore, begins with a brief discussion, in Section 2, of how these concepts have been dealt with in recent research. It points out that the accounts provided may well be insightful but do not help us to adequately discuss the basic question this paper wishes to address. Sections 3, 4 and 5 provide an outline of the key features of the first approach, the price-centered one. Sections 6 and 7 present the second approach, where prices are part of an instituted economy whose characteristics are strictly bound to systemic openness.

Section 8 provides an exemplification of how the two approaches address concrete issues by presenting a brief discussion of a historical case: the attempt by France’s President Francois Mitterand to carry out an expansionary macroeconomic policy during the monetarist 1980s. Based on the preceding discussion, Section 9 points out that, while some very general precepts may apply for all scholars from the perspective of open systems scholars these different grounds should in no way be neglected in favor of a desired and apparent unity of the discipline. If open systems economists underestimate the methodological differences between the two approaches, the risk is to do bad economics. More specifically, they may fail to identify policies that are actually able to transcend prices and the extant institutional setup. Section 10 briefly concludes.