A quantitative turn in the historiography of economics?

ABSTRACT

Quantitative approaches are not yet common among historians and methodologists of economics, although they are in the study of science by librarians, information scientists, sociologists, historians, and even economists. The main purpose of this essay is to reflect methodologically on the historiography of economics: is it witnessing a quantitative turn? Is such a turn desirable? We answer the first question by pointing out a ‘methodological moment’, in general, and a noticeable rise of quantitative studies among historians of economics during the past few years. To the second question, all contributors to this special issue bring relatively optimistic answers by highlighting the benefits of using quantitative methodologies as complements to the more traditional meta-analyses of both historians and methodologists of economics.     

Quantifying central banks’ scientization: why and how to do a quantified organizational history of economics

ABSTRACT

A subset of research in the history of economics is organizational history – i.e. the study of the organizations producing, circulating and applying economic ideas. This article maintains that some research questions in organizational history call for quantitative methods because they ask about magnitudes. More precisely, we claim that quantitative methods should complement rather than replace other research methods when the research question is at least partly about magnitudes. We walk the walk with a study of one type of organization, central banks, and of its changing relationship with economic science. Our results point unambiguously toward a growing dominance of central banks in the specialized field of monetary economics. Central banks have swelling research armies, they publish a growing share of the articles in specialized scholarly journals, and these articles tend to have more impact today than the articles produced outside central banks.     

Philosophy of Economics Rules: introduction to the symposium

ABSTRACT

Economists have long been criticized for their use of highly idealized models. In Economics rules: Why economics works, when it fails, and how to tell the difference [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015] Dani Rodrik responds to this criticism by offering an account of models that emphasizes the diversity of models in economics. Rodrik’s account presents a rare opportunity for economists and philosophers of economics to engage in a mutually beneficial exchange that could improve our understanding of the power and limits of economics, and the rights and wrongs of the dismal science. The symposium on Rodrik’s Economics Rules is the first attempt to seize this opportunity.     

Thorstein Veblen as Evolutionary Feminist Economist of the Progressive Era

Abstract

Just prior to the turn of the twentieth century, Thorstein Veblen advanced an evolutionary approach to feminist economics. A host of scholars considered in this inquiry are noted to have endorsed and also furthered his tradition. What distinguishes Veblen’s evolutionary approach to feminist economics is that he emphasizes that the roots of private property can be related to women being taken captive through warfare during the Age of Savagery. Instincts affecting behavior are viewed as relative constants, but which take on an evolutionary character when considered against what Veblen defines as four stages of social and economic development.     

Marxism,Crypto-Marxism and the Political Economy of Capitalism

ABSTRACT

This article conducts groundwork for a discussion of Marx’s influence through examining the boundaries of the specifically Marxian school of economics. This Marxian school extends well beyond the bounds of the self-identified Marxian school. Marx’s influence, Marxian themes and effectively Marxian theory can be found in several important heterodox traditions of economics, though this is often unacknowledged. A consideration of the proper boundaries of the Marxian school of economics is essential for a full understanding of Marx’s legacy and could contribute to the emergence of a more unified heterodoxy in economics.     

Relative and absolute scarcity of nature. Assessing the roles of economics and ecology for biodiversity conservation

Our aim in this essay is to identify and analyze some of the difficulties with interdisciplinary integration of economic and ecological contributions to the study of biodiversity loss. We develop our analysis from a widely accepted definition of economics which is based on the concept of scarcity. Taking a closer look at this notion, we find that economics actually limits itself to a very particular aspect of scarcity, which we denote as relative scarcity. We describe in what respect the economic approach towards biodiversity is based on this notion, and also reflect on the specific understanding of the relation of humans and nature behind the economic approach. We then turn to absolute scarcity as another notion of scarcity, and show that this is not within the scope of economics, but has been a theme of ecology and ecological economics. We describe in which way ecological and ecological–economic approaches towards biodiversity are based on the idea of absolute scarcity, and also reflect on the specific understanding of the human–nature relationship behind this notion of scarcity. Against this background, we discuss the roles of economics and ecology for nature conservation. We conclude that the interdisciplinary integration of ecology and economics requires a philosophical underpinning, and suggest a framework for further research.     

Reply to Frederic Lee's Comment on “The Citation Impact of Feminist Economics”

Abstract

This essay is a response to “A Comment on the Citation Impact of Feminist Economics,” by Frederic Lee, which appears in this issue ofFeminist Economics.

Frederic Lee's comment is a valuable addition to our understanding of the intellectual interactions between feminist economics and other schools of heterodox thought, and demonstrates how much can be learned by studying citation patterns.     

Research Ethics Education in Economics

Abstract

In this paper, we report the findings from the data we collected from a survey in order to measure how common research ethics education in economics is. We have found out that (1) research ethics is taught in only a very few economics departments around the globe; (2) topics related to research ethics are not taught in courses on economics and ethics; and (3) the number of papers published in specialised peer-reviewed journals on economics education is only a tiny fraction of the number of papers published in these journals. There has been no evidence in economics showing that economics departments have taken strong initiative on teaching research ethics to undergraduate and graduate students.     

Neither Lausanne nor Cambridge: Pantaleoni and the missing boundary between economics and sociology

Abstract

By the turn of the twentieth century, Lausanne and Cambridge were the centres of diffusion of two rival versions of marginalism. This paper focuses on the position of Maffeo Pantaleoni, a leading figure of the late nineteenth century ‘renaissance’ of Italian political economy, with respect to the eminent representatives of the two schools: Pareto and Marshall. Pantaleoni's position is examined with reference to the two main bones of contention between Pareto and Marshall, namely general as opposed to partial equilibrium, and pure as opposed to mixed economics.     

Barking up the right tree: Are small groups rational agents?

Both mainstream economics and its critics have focused on models of individual rational agents even though most important decisions are made by small groups. Little systematic work has been done to study the behavior of small groups as decision-making agents in markets and other strategic games. This may limit the relevance of both economics and its critics to the objective of developing an understanding of how most important decisions are made. In order to gain some insight into this issue, this paper compares group and individual economic behavior. The objective of the research is to learn whether there are systematic differences between decisions made by groups and individual agents in market environments characterized by risky outcomes. A quantitative measure of deviation from minimally-rational decisions is used to compare group and individual behavior in common value auctions. JEL Classification D44, C91, C92     

The arrow of time in economics: from Robinson's critique to the new historical economics

Abstract

How time is comprehended in economics is central to the type of discipline to which economics is analogized. Rejecting the symmetrical notion of time in classical physics, Joan Robinson emphasized the importance of ‘historical time’, and hence history. A new generation of economists – including Paul Krugman, Paul David, and Brian Arthur – took up Robinson's challenge, seeking to create a new historical economics by relating random or ‘accidental’ historical events in different ways to the necessity of economic rules, and finding that, as Robinson saw, scale effects were crucial. Their efforts, however, fell short of integrating history into economics.     

The history of economics as economics?

Abstract

This paper critically evaluates the current decline of the relationship between economics and the history of economics, and proposes a framework called the panorama-cum-scenario model for the practice of the history of economics. Starting with the Hegelian thesis that the history of economics is economics itself, the paper argues that such a relationship is necessary but not sufficient because the history of economics is a metatheory addressed to economic theory. The history of economics needs a panoramic view of the subject and a scenario for the construction, interpretation, and evaluation of the system of economics. The panorama-cum-scenario model enables us to work on the history of economics not only by historical and rational reconstruction but also by global reconstruction. Nietzsche's anti-Hegelian viewpoint and Heidegger's hermeneutical standpoint are useful for identifying the role of historical research in developing economic knowledge based on the panorama-cum-scenario model. Several approaches to the history of economics are examined in light of the panorama-cum-scenario model. Schumpeter's history of economics is interpreted as an example of the panorama-cum-scenario model.     

The Economist Watcher: Economic Contributions of David Colander

ABSTRACT

This article gives an appraisal of the work of David Colander. After a brief biographical summary, we look at his work in methodology and the role that institutions and ‘vision’ play in his economic analysis. A crucial part of his work in this area is viewing not only the economy but also the economic profession as an adaptive complex system. This leads us to his major contributions to macroeconomics and economic education. We conclude with an overall assessment of his contributions to economics.     

Comovement among returns of the private Chilean pension system

Abstract

The measurement of comovement among economic variables is key in several areas of economics and finance. This article examines the comovement among Pension Fund Administrators (AFPs) in the Chilean private pension system from 2005 to 2016. We use several statistical methods to assess the comovement among the returns during this period. We found evidence of strong comovement among the returns of all AFPs; the higher the percentage of risk rate of the investment instrument, the higher the comovement was. The introduction of a new AFP in 2010 did not change the comovement patterns. The comovement analysis study shows that the quality attributes of the products offered by the AFPs are homogeneous, supporting the idea that concentrated markets with homogeneous products could incentivize tacit collusive behavior, which could distort the functioning of the pension market, thereby affecting the aggregate well-being of workers.     

Calls for change. The scientific status of economic theory and the future of democracy: A review of three recent contributions

Abstract

After the last financial crisis, economic theory and economists have largely lost their credibility. Not having been able to foresee and explain the recession, they have clearly shown that a deep methodological reform of the discipline is necessary. With its restrictive assumptions and the self-referentiality of formal models, mainstream economics has indeed become highly unrealistic and therefore unable to face the deep and evident problems of capitalistic society. The books reviewed in this paper try to criticize economic theory from three closely related points of view: the technical drift that has endangered democracy and annulled the role of citizens in public choices, the sometimes obscure role of economists and the way through which articles of low scientific relevance are published, and finally the decisive role of the Nobel Prize in economics to legitimize the market turn begun in the 1970s. Considering such a discouraging picture, it is necessary to ask whether there is still hope for reforming economics and if, possibly returning to the classics of economic thought, it is still possible to carry out a struggle based on ideas and not on dogmatic prejudices.     

Orthodox Core–Heterodox Periphery? Contrasting Citation Networks of Economics Departments in Vienna

ABSTRACT

The notion of an ‘orthodox core–heterodox periphery’ structure and the extent of interdisciplinary links have been widely discussed, and partially investigated bibliometrically, within economic discourse. We extend this research by applying tools from social network analysis to citation data of three economics departments located in Vienna, two mainstream and one non-mainstream, to assess their relative citation patterns. We show that both mainstream economics departments follow the asserted core–periphery pattern and have a mono-disciplinary research focus, while the citation network of the non-mainstream department has a polycentric structure and is both more heterodox and interdisciplinary. These findings suggest that discussions about the future of heterodox economics should pay more attention to the organizational level and seek allies from other disciplines.     

THE CITATION IMPACT OF FEMINIST ECONOMICS

Abstract

Feminist economics is a transformative project. However, transformation generates resistance. Feminist economics can be deliberately excluded, co-opted through an uncritical application of rational choice theory, or ignored. And feminist economics can be listened to: when the United Nations consults feminist economists; when feminist economists publish in widely read journals; when a student finds inspiration in a Feminist Economics article. All of these are ways feminist economics can, and has, influenced the profession. After ten years of discourse, it is possible to take stock and assess the impact of feminist economics. This article provides a partial assessment through a consideration of citations of the journal Feminist Economics, describing its impact on mainstream economics, heterodox economics, and other disciplines. While the overall project of feminist economics encompasses much more than just one journal, studying the citations for Feminist Economics is a first step toward assessing the influence of the entire corpus.     

Holding back from theory: limits and methodological alternatives of randomized field experiments in development economics

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we critically and constructively examine the methodology of evidence-based development economics, which deploys randomized field experiments (RFEs) as its main tool. We describe the context in which this movement started, and illustrate in detail how RFEs are designed and implemented in practice, drawing on a series of experiments by Pascaline Dupas and her colleagues on the use of bednets, saving and governance in Kenya. We show that this line of experiments have evolved to address the limitation of obtaining policy-relevant insights from RFEs alone, characterized as their lack of external validity in the literature. After examining the two prominent responses by leading figures of evidence-based development economics, namely machine learning and structured speculation, we propose an alternative methodological strategy that incorporates two sub-fields, namely experimental economics and behavioral economics, to complement RFEs in investigating the data-generating process underlying the treatment effects of RFEs. This strategy highlights promising methodological developments in RFEs neither captured by the two proposals nor recognized by methodologists, and also guides how to combine different sub-fields of economics.     

The changing face of mainstream economics

This article argues that economics is currently undergoing a fundamental shift in its method, away from neoclassical economics and into something new. Although that something new has not been fully developed, it is beginning to take form and is centered on dynamics, recursive methods and complexity theory. The foundation of this change is coming from economists who are doing cutting edge work and influencing mainstream economics. These economists are defining and laying the theoretical groundwork for the fundamental shift that is occurring in the economics profession.