Informality: Causes,consequences and policy responses

A stylized prediction of the development economics discourse is that informality will disappear with development, and yet in the last 20 years conventional measures of informality, far from declining, have either remained stagnant or have actually increased. This includes countries such as India where economic growth has been at historically high levels. What exactly is informality and what are its magnitudes and trends? What are the causes of informality and why is it not decreasing as predicted by standard theories of development? What are the consequences for inclusive economic growth of a large and increasing informal sector? What are feasible and desirable policy responses to informality? These are the questions that motivate this broad based overview of informality. The questions will be addressed based on recent and ongoing research on India and globally.     

Bringing the patient back in: behavioral decision-making and choice in medical economics

We explore the behavioral methodology and “revolution” in economics through the lens of medical economics. We address two questions: (1) Are mainstream economic assumptions of utility-maximization realistic approximations of people’s actual behavior? (2) Do people maximize subjective expected utility, particularly in choosing from among the available options? In doing so, we illustrate–in terms of a hypothetical experimental sample of patients with dry eye diagnosis—why and how utility in pharmacoeconomic assessments might be valued differently by patients when subjective psychological, social, cognitive, and emotional factors are considered. While experimentally-observed or surveyed behavior yields stated (rather than revealed) preferences, behaviorism offers a robust toolset in understanding drug, medical device, and treatment-related decisions compared to the optimizing calculus assumed by mainstream economists. It might also do so more perilously than economists have previously understood, in light of the intractable uncertainties, information asymmetries, insulated third-party agents, entry barriers, and externalities that characterize healthcare. Behavioral work has been carried out in many sub-fields of economics. Only recently has it been extended to healthcare. This offers medical economists both the challenge and opportunity of balancing efficiency presumptions with relatively autonomous patient choices, notwithstanding their predictable, yet seemingly consistent, irrationality. Despite its comparative youth and limitations, the scientific contributions of behaviorism are secure and its future in medical economics appears to be promising.     

The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science

When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession—they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the perspective of all the social sciences. When considered in reference to the social science profession rather than in reference to the economics profession, the amount of pluralism increases significantly, since different social sciences follow quite different methodologies. But looking at pluralism from the social science perspective reveals a different type of pluralism problem in social science. While there may be plenty of pluralism within social science as a whole, there is a serious question about whether it is appropriately distributed. This paper argues that heterodox economists' agenda should be a greater blending of all the social science departments. It summarizes proposals to do so on both the undergraduate level and graduate level, and explains why supporting variations of these proposals would be a strategy that would further the objectives of most heterodox economists more than would their current strategy of pushing for more pluralism in economics.     

Distinguishing characteristics of ahuman economics

What are the requirements for an economics that is compatible with, and affirmative of, a meaninful image of human nature? Where does conventional economic theory show its most glaring deficiencies in this respect? What are the core human values that need to inform economic thought capable of guiding us in the design and construction of a more humane economic system? Why is the bulk of contemporary heterodox economic thinking antagonistic to the project of a human-centered economics? These are the basic questions addressed and explored in this article.     

Using Field Experiments to Change the Template of How We Teach Economics

In this article, the author explains why field experiments can improve what we teach and how we teach economics. Economists no longer operate as passive observers of economic phenomena. Instead, they participate actively in the research process by collecting data from field experiments to investigate the economics of everyday life. This change can be shown to students by presenting them with evidence from field experiments. Field experiments related to factor markets, behavioral economics, and discrimination are presented to explain how this approach works across different economic content. The three questions that are highlighted are the following: (1) Why do women get paid less than men in labor markets? (2) How can we use behavioral economics to motivate teachers? (3) What seven words can end third-degree price discrimination?     

Influencing the perception of what and who is important in ecological economics

In a recent article using citation analysis Hoepner et al. (2012) make strong claims to have identified the most influential works, authors, journals and institutions in a hypothetical field they call environmental and ecological economics. This paper shows that their work is biased by its framing, far from the non-subjective approach they claim and highly sensitive to minor data errors. More than this the exercise can be seen as another example of how ecological economics is susceptible to suppression by a dominant mainstream economic perspective which attempts to override, belittle and dismiss a whole range of alternative thought, including that which is heterodox, interdisciplinary, from the natural sciences and based in the non-economic social sciences. Ecological economics is not the same as agricultural, resource or environmental economics, and if it were it would be pointless. Neither can it be understood or treated as a subfield of resource and environmental economics, as done by Hoepner et al. (2012). I argue that the study promotes a limited perspective on social, environmental and economic problems that includes an implicit political and ideological framing. What is most influential, important or high quality in ecological economics is certainly not defined by such work.     

Scientific misconduct and the responsible conduct of research in science and economics

Abstract

Considered here are matters relating to the responsible conduct of research in economics and science in the United States for the last forty years. In science there was a “late 20th century wave” of scientific misconduct and then a “millennial wave”. For economics in the former era, episodes of honest error and replication failure occurred. Recently plagiarism and data manipulation have been reported. Overall few economists seem to fabricate data, but falsification of data, replication failure, and plagiarism occur. Furthermore, replication failure is the one thing that scientific misconduct and honest error have in common. In economics and compared to the sciences, there have been no misconduct hearings, no economist has been charged with a crime, nor has anyone served time in prison for scientific misconduct. Science and economics seem to be sufficiently self-corrective so that systemic science failure does not utterly thwart scientific progress in the long run.     

Margaret G. Reid: Life and achievements

Feminist critics of mainstream economics, and of the neoclassical paradigm in particular, have focused primarily on exposing and questioning the gender biases and androcentric claims to neutrality, objectivity and rationality of the most male-dominated discipline among the social sciences. The scientific method and mathematical sophistry so cherished in the discipline have also come under severe attack from several quarters. However, despite the intellectual ferment and some practical gains for women that these criticisms have engendered, even today the substantial contributions several women scholars have made to the field of economics are not well known or fully acknowledged. This paper traces and highlights Margaret Reid's contributions to the development of some core theories in economics. While several of her male colleagues whose work she had inspired or contributed to have been awarded the Nobel Prize, the discipline of economics still owes a huge debt to Reid and to several other women economists.     

The Future of Personnel Economics

Personnel economics has grown over the past 20 years to become a major branch of labour economics. Although much has been learned, many important questions remain. For example, are worker wage profiles dependent on individual attributes or is the firm more important in determining wage growth? Why are executives so highly paid and why does pay take the form that it does? How can cross-country differences in pay patterns be explained? Does variable pay provide better incentives than fixed hourly wages? Under which circumstances is one form of compensation used over another? These questions and others are investigated and some conjectures offered.     

What are the ethics of welfare economics? And,are welfare economists utilitarians?

Four questions: (1) What is welfare economics? (2) Is it an ethical system?  (3) How do welfare economists differ from one another? And (4), how do they differ from other economic ethicists? Then utilitarianism is discussed. I was taught, and have inferred to others, that welfare economists are utilitarians. They are not. Welfare economics is an atypical form of welfare consequentialism: consequentialist in that whether an act or policy is right or wrong is a function of only its consequences—the adjective “welfare” because the only consequences that matter are the welfare (well-faring) consequences. Most welfare consequentialists are neither welfare economists nor utilitarians. And, most moral philosophers are not welfare consequentialists—neither are most normal folk.     

如何看待当前的经济学国际化现象——从社会科学和自然科学的理论研究之差异谈起

现代西方主流经济学把经济学作为自然科学来研究,强调经济学的普遍性和客观性.正因如此,国内经济学也开始兴起了一股经济学国际接轨的浪潮,主张国内经济学要向欧美经济学看齐.但实际上,经济学本质上属于社会科学,而社会科学与自然科学的研究具有非常不同的特点:它关注本土现象,具有强烈的人文性,理论发展也呈现出否定之否定的轨迹.所以,当前这种经济学国际化的浪潮和路径必须引起深刻的反思.     

经济学的科学性意味着什么——经济学的双重属性及其研究思维

经济学的研究对象涵盖了人与自然以及人与社会这两个关系层面,涉及到自然世界和生活世界两大领域,因此,经济学本身具有人文性和科学性的双重特性,它们也典型地体现在经济学理论研究的两个相应阶段上.但是,不管在对经济学性质的认知上存在何等的不同,经济学都不能直接归入自然科学的范畴,因为无论是在科学的内涵、研究的目的还是研究的方法上,经济学与自然科学都存在很大差异:经济学注重思辨性,其理论也带有强烈的主观性和规范性.因此,尽管我们强调经济学要朝科学化的方向发展,但其科学性的麦加并非就是以物理学为代表的自然科学.     

Perspectives for Post-Keynesian Economics

The paper reviews and assesses the negative and positive advice which has been offered by various fellow economists to heterodox economists in general, and Post-Keynesian economists in particular, in light of changes that have occurred within neoclassical economics and in light of the rising hegemony of mainstream economics in economics departments. Various strategies are considered, among which is more engagement with orthodox dissenters, but it is concluded that the majority of heterodox economists ought instead to engage more with other heterodox economists and possibly other social sciences, developing and expanding their own agenda around real-world problems.     

Symposium on Social Capital: Introduction

This symposium contains three papers that discuss aspects of social capital. Social capital has become a major focus of research in many social sciences. Its increased prominence in economics reflects a general increase in interest in questions that have traditionally been deemed sociological. Regardless of one's opinion of social capital per se , this broadening of questions addressed within economics has been very salutary.     

国有中小企业产权改革及政府在改革进程中的角色——山东诸城国有中小企业改革

中国国有企业的改革是市场取向的。企业作为真正市场主体 ,其基本条件或资格就是企业产权的独立。因此 ,所谓国有企业改革 ,核心内容就是产权改革 ,是产权结构的重构。首要的一步就是改革国家所有、国家经营的单一产权结构 ,实质上是国家要改变自己在企业中的产权地位 ,放弃一些产权控制。国家之所以要这样做 ,是可以用经济学的原理加以解释的。这种产权改革是国有企业制度变迁首要的和关键的一步 ,但并不是最后一步和惟一重要的一步。有了第一步的产权改革后 ,作为国家具体操作主体的各级政府在进一步的改革中还能做什么 ?政府又有何得失 ?…     

Introduction to "Exchange Rates in Europe and Australasia: Fundamental Determinants, Adjustments and Policy Implications"

The papers in this issue are concerned with the behaviour of exchange rates — their fundamental determinants, adjustment processes and policy implications. The authors combine theory with empirical evidence, test hypotheses as well as show the relevance of their analysis for policy. This Introduction addresses several questions. What are the contributions of the articles to the economics of exchange rates? Are they significant in increasing our understanding of the current issues and in addressing questions of policy? How can one explain the movements in the European and the Asian currencies? What can we expect to happen to the euro with the enlargement of the euro area? Do the papers provide frameworks to guide empirical research? In this Introduction, we highlight aspects of each paper that addresses these issues.     

An Interview with Barbara Bergmann: Leading feminist economist

Barbara Bergmann, Emerita Professor of Economics at both the American University and the University of Maryland, has been a leader in the development and establishment of feminist economics, in scholarly, policy and organizational capacities. Professor Bergmann is particularly known for her crowding model of discrimination. She is the author of an excellent, accessible undergraduate textbook, The Economic Emergence of Women (1986) . She has authored several policy-oriented books, including In Defense of Affirmative Action (1996a), Saving Our Children from Poverty: what the United States can learn from France (1996b) , and What Child Care System for America? (2000). Professor Bergmann is past president of the Society for the Advancement of Socioeconomics, the Eastern Economic Association and the International Association for Feminist Economics. She received her PhD in economics from Harvard in 1959. This interview was conducted at the ASSA meetings in Chicago on 4 January 1998.     

Reform,Growth, and Inequality in China*

This paper provides a survey of the literature on inequality in China – level, change, causes, and consequences. It attempts to answer six main questions. How much has inequality risen? What is its relation to poverty alleviation? What has happened to wealth inequality? What are the main dimensions of rising income inequality? The dimensions examined are: the rural–urban divide; urban labor market reform; regional divergence; rural–urban migration; and entrepreneurship, rent‐seeking, and corruption. Was it inevitable that inequality should rise so much? Does it matter that inequality has risen? Income distribution in China is bound up with both economic reform and economic growth. This paper concludes by considering the countervailing forces that will determine the path of inequality in future years.     

Commodity Prices and the New Inflation

The intention of the article is to explore trends in economics and sociology, as well as other science disciplines, like history, psychology and anthropology, and investigate the interdisciplinary exchanges that have taken place, leading to convergences and divergences between academic subjects. The “imperialism of economics” is increasingly approaching traditional academic fields of history, psychology, and sociology. However, the article concludes that sociology’s public reputation may have declined, while simultaneously economics is shifting its attention to the social dimension of economic behavior and moving toward the other social sciences; a process which has been coined “social-scienciation.” The argument is that those developments can also be seen as chances to upgrade the social sciences “around” economics. The described process also aligns with recent talk about a need for interdisciplinary studies when this article adopts a different take on the issues of interdisciplinarity and embeddedness.     

Directed Technical Change

For many problems in macroeconomics, development economics, labour economics, and international trade, whether technical change is biased towards particular factors is of central importance. This paper develops a simple framework to analyse the forces that shape these biases. There are two major forces affecting equilibrium bias: the price effect and the market size effect. While the former encourages innovations directed at scarce factors, the latter leads to technical change favouring abundant factors. The elasticity of substitution between different factors regulates how powerful these effects are, determining how technical change and factor prices respond to changes in relative supplies. If the elasticity of substitution is sufficiently large, the long run relative demand for a factor can slope up.
I apply this framework to develop possible explanations to the following questions: why technical change over the past 60 years was skill biased, and why the skill bias may have accelerated over the past 25 years? Why new technologies introduced during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were unskill biased? What is the effect of biased technical change on the income gap between rich and poor countries? Does international trade affect the skill bias of technical change? What are the implications of wage push for technical change? Why is technical change generally labour augmenting rather than capital augmenting?