Heterodox economics has two main aspects: first, to criticize mainstream (orthodox) economics, in its various guises; and second, to develop an alternative way forward. The aim of this book is to convey, using a historical narrative, some of the weaknesses of mainstream economics and how alternative, heterodox approaches can help understand how economies work.

Underpinning this short history is an emphasis on the pluralism of heterodox economics, as it engages with a multiplicity of ideas, disciplines, methods and voices: distinct but intersecting dimensions of heterodoxy (see Figure 1). Three main things have inspired me to organize this book around these dimensions. First, there is Fred Lee. In 1999, in protest against the exclusion of heterodox ideas from mainstream economics in the UK, he organized an audacious fringe conference that took place alongside the annual conference of the Royal Economic Society in Nottingham (Lee 2002). I am proud to have been there, and also to have later served as co-ordinator of the Association for Heterodox Economics (AHE) that was created out of it. I continue to be inspired by Fred's open approach to heterodox economics, where he “refers to specific economic theories and a community of economists that are in various ways an alternative to neoclassical economics. Consequently, it is a multi-level term that refers to a group of economic theories – specifically Post Keynesian-Sraffian, Marxist radical, Institutional-evolutionary, social, feminist, Austrian, and ecological economics” (Lee 2009: 6–7).

Fred was convinced that these different schools of thought should talk to each other and gain strength from numbers.