During the fifties and the sixties the neoclassical concept of the
production function was criticized in numerous papers. In particular,
the aggregation of different capital goods into a single number was
reprehended. A second essential disadvantage, namely the neglect of the
time structure of the production process, found, however, rela- tively
little attention. While up to the thirties the Austrian capital theory
which stressed the time aspect of production was an important school, it
fell into oblivion after the great capital controversies of the
thirties. It took over thirty years, i. e. till the beginning of the
seventies be- fore it came to a renaissance of the Austrian capital
theory by var- ious writers. We may roughly classify the different
attempts of Hits rebirth in modern economics" into three groups: 1. The
approach of [1970, 1973, 1973a] has received most of the attention in
the literature (Burmeister [1974], Faber [1975], Fehl [1975],
[1975], Hagemann and [1976]). It will be shown in Chapter 9 that is
only in so far a Neo-Austrian as he does explicitly take into
consideration the vertical time structure of the production process. But
he does not use the Austrian concepts of superiority of roundabout
methods, of time preference and of the period of production. 2. The
latter concept has been revived by the second group, to which Tintner
[1970], von Weizs cker [1971a, 1971b, 1974], [1971, 1976 and
[1973, 1975, 1976] belong.