Galbraith’s Obviated Market: Some Empirical Evidence

Unlike the methodological sciences, such as mathematics and decision theory, which use the hypothetical-deductive method and may be fully expressed in complex mathematical models because their only truth criterion is logical consistency; the substantive sciences that have as their truth criterion the correspondence to reality, adopt an empirical-deductive method, and are supposed to generalize from often unreliable regularities and tendencies. Given this assumption, it is very difficult for economists to predict economic behavior, particularly major financial crises.     

Modelling change in individual characteristics: An axiomatic framework

Economic models describe individuals by underlying characteristics, such as the degree to which they like music, have sympathy, want success, need recognition, etc. In reality, such characteristics change through experiences: taste for Mozart changes through attending concerts, sympathy through meeting people, etc. Models typically ignore change, partly because it is unclear how to incorporate it. I develop a general axiomatic framework for defining, analysing and comparing rival models of change. Seemingly basic postulates on modelling change have strong implications, like irrelevance of the order in which someone has his experiences and ‘linearity’ of change. This paper is a step towards placing the modelling of change on axiomatic grounds and enabling non-arbitrary incorporation of change into economic models.     

The Histonomic Approach to Economics: Beyond Pure Theory and Pure Experience

This article starts off with the distinction between logico-deductive and empirico-deductive approaches to economic theory. The logicodeductive approach, for instance neoclassical economics, uses an axiomatic framework that has only little empirical substance. The empirico-deductive approach, for instance, Ricardian economics, attempts to state economic theory as a “typical” structure of reality. It appears that the latter approach touches reality more closely and is more sensitive to intellectual enrichment and to substantial empirical evidence. However, both approaches operate within the basic assumption applied in classical physics, that theory must represent an invariant structure of reality—highlighting in this case economic phenomena that do not change over time. In the following, the induction issue is given new life, suggesting its validity under the non-conventional assumptions ofvariancy and time-asymmetry. A “histonomic” approach stressing the importance of making theoretical (-nomic) statements about economic phenomena that are basically historical (histo-) in their non-classical properties of variancy and time-asymmetry is favored.     

Contemporary Capitalism as a New Monetary Economy of Production: The Logic of Conventions,M&A,and LBOs

Social interaction models, i.e. the changing sequence of actions between individuals who modify their behavior under the influence of their peers, have rarely enjoyed as high a profile in economic analysis as they do today. However, the literature growth has not been accompanied by a process of academic consolidation. The difficulties encountered in research are largely but not entirely the result of data constraints. The main argument of this article is that the source of problems may be traceable to the lack of a complementary approach between economics and other disciplines. The difficulties presented by the deficit in academic exchange among social scientists are compounded by the current analytical framework, which still concentrates on the fundamental, but mutually exclusive, traditions of thought: homo oeconomicus and homo sociologicus. In spotlighting these ideas, this article reviews the economic body of literature on social interactions and their effect on individual unemployment status. Two directions in current research are analyzed: the impact of social (work) norms on unemployment and the role of social networks in the job search process. The theoretical and methodological challenges encountered in research suggest that the future of social interactions models might be found at the crossroads of economics and other social sciences.     

The Economics of Social Interactions: An Interdisciplinary Ground for Social Scientists?

Social interaction models, i.e. the changing sequence of actions between individuals who modify their behavior under the influence of their peers, have rarely enjoyed as high a profile in economic analysis as they do today. However, the literature growth has not been accompanied by a process of academic consolidation. The difficulties encountered in research are largely but not entirely the result of data constraints. The main argument of this article is that the source of problems may be traceable to the lack of a complementary approach between economics and other disciplines. The difficulties presented by the deficit in academic exchange among social scientists are compounded by the current analytical framework, which still concentrates on the fundamental, but mutually exclusive, traditions of thought: homo oeconomicus and homo sociologicus. In spotlighting these ideas, this article reviews the economic body of literature on social interactions and their effect on individual unemployment status. Two directions in current research are analyzed: the impact of social (work) norms on unemployment and the role of social networks in the job search process. The theoretical and methodological challenges encountered in research suggest that the future of social interactions models might be found at the crossroads of economics and other social sciences.     

Economists,social reformers,and prophets: a feminist critique of economic efficiency

This article examines the concept of Pareto optimality, bringing to light some of its implicit assumptions about the nature of human agency, work, and gender. It explores the androcentric character of the economic agent and the gendered nature of neoclassical models in relation to the historical development of the concept of economic efficiency during the late 1930s. The thrust toward the development of Pareto optimality as a scientific criterion of economic welfare was a response to the methodological tensions between the clearly political nature of economics and the scientific aspirations of economists. An examination of the debates from this period illuminates some of the values that became embedded in neoclassical economics, and which are now hidden by the masks of mathematics and abstraction.     

Experimental economics under the microscope

Although experimental economics has been one of the most rapidlyexpanding fields in economics in recent years, it has so farattracted little sustained methodological discussion. This paperis intended as a step towards filling the gap, and providespreliminary answers to the following questions. (i) What aredistinctive characteristics of the experimental method in economics?(ii) To what extent are the results obtained in the laboratorytransferable to non-laboratory situations? (iii) What are thelimits of the experimental method in economics? (iv) Why isit that experimentation, which has been so successful in thenatural sciences, remains so controversial in the social sciences.     

The Recent Critique of Theoretical Economics: A Methodologically Informed Investigation

My purpose is to appraise the recent critique of theoretical economics by applying the methodological perspective. Therefore, I start by identifying the main lines of criticism raised against theoretical economics in the aftermath of the post-2008 global economic crisis: namely, the voices criticizing economics for its unrealistic models, excessive mathematization, and overconfidence in its theoretical claims. First, I show that these issues are interconnected and should be jointly analyzed. Next, I investigate these lines of critique from the perspective provided by the latest achievements in the philosophy of economics (e.g., studies on the epistemic role of economic models). Taking this perspective reinforces some allegations against economics (e.g., these voices accusing economists of treating economic laws as universal laws of nature) and makes some criticisms more nuanced (e.g., the issue of unrealistic assumptions). I conclude by stating that such a methodological perspective is necessary in critically apprising the recent critique of economics.     

西方主流经济学的基本分析框架及其缺陷—一个基于演化本体论视角的阐释

西方主流经济学的分析框架是以对实在基本假定为基础的,但根据演化本体论,这种对实在的基本假定却背离了经济实在的根本结构和性质,它将有机层级结构还原为原子式个体,将开放系统简化为封闭系统,排除了对于理解经济系统绝不可少的解释要素。正是这种根本缺陷导致了西方主流经济学无法有效处理诸如内生新奇创生、历史时间、系统效应、生产和经济欠发达这样的重要经济学问题。     

Truth,self, and feminism

Humanistic economics is founded on the reality of human needs. One of those needs is for truth. According to the correspondence theory, that truth is a relation between statement and objective reality. This reality serves as a constraint on the (ego) self. Therefore, it can also be shown that self-interest is an independent principle from the commitment to truth, and that these two principles can clash. These two principles of the self, or the “higher” and “lower” self, constitute what we call the dual self. In a critique of humanistic economics from a feminist direction, Julie Nelson has claimed that such dualisms form a hierarchy that is sympathetic of patriarchal hierarchies. In a previous response to that criticism we showed that Nelson’s own work involved similar hierarchies. Here we attempt to show how Nelson's conception of value hierarchies involving the feminine and masculine and our conception can be resolved into one coherent framework.     

The behavioral foundations of Austrian economics

Behavioral and experimental economics present challenges to the neoclassical theory of individual behavior, which is based on individuals making choices within the framework of utility functions that are assumed to have certain well-defined characteristics. Results in behavioral and experimental economics have shown that it is common for individual behavior to systematically deviate from the neoclassical axioms of utility maximization. Austrian economics is also based on axiomatic theories of utility maximization, but the assumptions underlying utility-maximizing behavior are much weaker in the Austrian approach. As a result, they have more solid behavioral foundations and are less subject to challenge by the empirical findings of behavioral and experimental economics. Neoclassical policy conclusions are often overly strong because of its behavioral foundations which are challenged by behavioral and experimental economics and are often misleading because of the comparative static nature of neoclassical welfare economics. For purposes of policy analysis, the Austrian approach provides better insights because of its more realistic behavioral foundations.     

自然资源与经济增长:资源瓶颈及其解决途径

本文试图在新古典经济学框架内,解析古典经济学关于自然资源制约经济增长的传统,并揭示克服资源瓶颈的可能途径。文章首先扩展新古典索洛模型,证明在特定技术条件下,自然资源的固定禀赋最终将使经济增长停滞。然后分别探讨了解决资源瓶颈的两种机制。其一是产业转移,即开放条件下,厂商为摆脱本地资源瓶颈,通过向外地转移资本和劳动以利用该地的自然资源,从而带动了该后起地区的经济增长。其二是技术进步,即在封闭条件下,厂商将把一部分产出投入于研发活动,不断开发出自然资源增进型技术,从而推动本地区的又一波长期增长。     

旅行经济模型的构建与实证

旅行是旅游经济分析中一个重要问题,在人们决定外出旅行之后,必须要对旅行方式进行选择,本文对该选择行为进行经济模型的构造和分析,并加以实证.实证结果表明,本文的旅行经济模型可以解释现实的旅行方式选择.     

神经经济学——经济学领域的“新大陆”

传统经济学在研究消费决策时通常假设人是理性的,总是在约束条件下寻求利益的最大化。而大量的现实经济活动表明,人在作出决策时往往不是出于理性的判断。对于那些传统经济学模型无法解释的行为,通过借助现代神经医学设备,研究人员能够在神经层面触及决策潜意识,重建经济学对经济行为的解释框架。     

A critique of capitalist man

Humanistic economics is founded on the reality of human needs. One of those needs is for truth. According to the correspondence theory, that truth is a relation between statement and objective reality. This reality serves as a constraint on the (ego) self. Therefore, it can also be shown that self-interest is an independent principle from the commitment to truth, and that these two principles can clash. These two principles of the self, or the “higher” and “lower” self, constitute what we call the dual self.     

Homo Economicus,AIs, humans and rats: decision-making and economic welfare

ABSTRACT

Critics of economics often highlight two related issues: the empirical falsity of the ‘homo economicus’ assumption of rational, self-interested maximisation; and the ethical consequences of models based on this assumption. Yet many experiments in biology show non-human creatures often seem to behave as if they were rational maximisers, suggesting that context rather than cognitive capacity is important for determining behaviour. The critique of rational choice poses a less serious methodological challenge to economics than is sometimes thought. However, economists do need to respond to the ethical critique that decisions and policies based on the assumption of rational self-interested maximisation change the norms of individual behaviour for the worse. This paper argues that economics has become divorced from ethics because for a century it has dealt only with ordinal, not cardinal, welfare rankings and has thus ruled out interpersonal comparisons. While enabling economists to separate normative from positive analysis, this separation protocol has left welfare economics both internally contradictory and unable to address major societal decisions, even though welfare economics is used constantly in limited ways, such as cost-benefit analysis. This separation reflects empirically inaccurate assumptions concerning preference formation and the conditions of supply and demand (but not the rational choice assumption) in the foundational welfare economic theorems. Economics must urgently revisit welfare economics, particularly in the context of modern economies in which individuals are increasingly interdependent, and the assumptions required for the fundamental welfare theorems therefore increasingly invalid.     

The status of economics as a naturalistic social science

Naturalistic social science is held frequently to be the mosteffective means of discovering social reality (e.g., Kincaid,H. 1996. Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences: AnalyzingControversies in Social Research, Cambridge, Cambridge UniversityPress; McIntyre, L. 1996. Laws and Explanation in the SocialSciences, Boulder, CO, Westview). This paper evaluates economicsas such a science. From Kincaid (1996), criteria for naturalismin social science are identified. The focus here is whetherrational, objective empirical methods exist for choosing economictheories; whether fair, cross and independent tests exist fortheories, assumptions and methodological norms; and whethereconomic theories chosen in these ways have public policy relevance.Examples from economics are related to each of these naturalisticcriteria. These encompass the relevance of econometrics to testingeconomic theories, the complications the non-natural-kind qualityof economic variables impose on testing, and the question ofwhether naturalistic methods reveal economic reality. The paperconcludes that the practice of economics does not, and is notable to, rely on naturalistic methods.     

新制度经济学的新发展与政治学新制度主义:比较与启示

新制度经济学和政治学新制度主义在发展中都因为缺乏现实性、历史性和社会性而受到批评.面对相似的问题,经济学领域兴起了以青木和格雷夫为代表的比较制度分析,政治学领域兴起了历史制度主义和社会学制度主义.本文从制度观、制度对行为的影响、制度的变迁、过去的制度对现在制度的影响、文化观念和意识形态在制度形成和发展中的作用等方面,对比较制度分析和历史制度主义、社会学制度主义进行了比较,就未来制度研究的发展趋势提出了看法.     

“双一流”建设与经济学发展的中国贡献?

作为社会科学的“皇冠”,经济学的学科建设在中国“双一流”建设中,尤其在世界一流学科建设中具有重要意义,也将对中国全面深化改革以实现国家治理现代化提供重要的现实指导。文章首先分析了世界一流经济学科建设之于“双一流”战略导向的契合度,然后探讨了中国的世界一流经济学科建设所面临的难点及其突破点,进而阐述了中国可从哪些方面为经济学的发展和创新做出贡献。研究认为,打造中国的世界一流经济学科需要按照国际同行学术标准进行评价,所研究的问题(包括中国问题)应该是国际同行关注的问题,从而需要从完善学科分类评价体系、加强原创性研究和高层次人才集聚等方面加以突破。与此同时,针对经济学在中国的发展和创新,研究指出,对于中国传统经济思想的历史禀赋和现代价值的挖掘、具有原创性的理论研究和方法论研究创新以及基于中国经济改革发展实践的理论提炼升华,是中国经济学界可以且应该做出重要贡献的三个方向。     

What can econophysics contribute to financial economics?

Econophysics presents itself as a new paradigm and a new specialty (or even a discipline), using various models and concepts imported from condensed matter and statistical physics to analyze financial phenomena. Financial economics is becoming more and more concerned by the emergence of econophysics because this new field deals with the economic reality. In this perspective, one might ask “What can econophysics contribute to financial economics?” After emphasizing the main differences between financial economics and econophysics, this paper will show that these two disciplines can be complementary. I then provide some research themes from econophysics that could be a source of inspiration for financial economists to broaden their theoretical framework.