Economics

Меняющееся лицо экономики

Jan 10, 2020 Dani Rodrik

КЕМБРИДЖ – В ответ на внутреннее и внешнее давление, экономическая профессия постепенно меняется в лучшую сторону. Неудивительно, что популистская реакция, охватившая в последние годы развитые демократии, привела к некоторому самоанализу в данной дисциплине. В конце концов, жесткая экономия, соглашения о свободной торговле, финансовая либерализация и дерегулирование рынка труда, которые это вызвали, основывались на идеях экономистов.

Но трансформация выходит за рамки принципов экономической политики. В рамках дисциплины, наконец, приходится считаться с иерархической практикой и агрессивной культурой семинаров, которые создали неблагоприятную среду для женщин и меньшинств. Опрос, проведенный Американской экономической ассоциацией (AEA) в 2019 году, показал, что почти половина женщин-экономистов чувствовала дискриминацию или несправедливое отношение из-за своего пола. Около трети цветных экономистов чувствовали, несправедливое к себе отношение из-за своей расовой или этнической принадлежности.

Эти ошибки могут быть связаны. Профессия, которая менее разнообразна и менее открыта для разных личностей, более склонна к проявлению группового мышления и высокомерия. Если она призвана генерировать идеи, чтобы помочь обществу достичь всеобщего процветания, то должна начать с того, чтобы самой стать более инклюзивной.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 12 Comments on this article

Chandrashekar Tamirisa Feb 10, 2020

That economic development means ever more consumption of goods and services is precisely the wrong understanding of the economy. The stake through the heart of economics, the science of scarcity, is its presumption of eternal abundance. It is alchemy to seek the elixir of youth and cornucopia. History is riddled with quacks and charlatans peddling immortality and abundance. Overestimating and extrapolating the capacity of technology to increase longevity to live forever and produce plenty is absurd. Economics needs to be rewritten to address this contradiction at its core. Malthus will prove to be true in the long run and, as Keynes said, we are all dead by then.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Brian Cooksey Feb 3, 2020

I think there's a category error in DR'd article. Why should making the economics profession more gender and ethnically inclusive influence the underlying tenets of economic theory? Inclusivity is an ethical issue, economic theory is supposed to be 'ethically neutral', objective. There are no inherent gender or ethnic co-variants to economic theory. More female economists could (in theory) assure that researchers pay more attention to gender issues, which are, of course, legion in micro-economics. But greater inclusion will have little or no influence on trade, monetary, or industrial economics. The 'changing face of economics' is a theoretical issue, not one of inclusivity regarding gender and diversity. For sure, most of us would like to hear more from female, non-Caucasian / Judeo-Christian / non-Western economists and to look more closely at issues that have been either ignored or understudied and under-theorised.
But by far my main concern is that the 'changing face of economics' ignores entirely the fundamental challenge to economic theory posed by climate change, or rather catastrophe, a silence that has been inherent in mainstream economics from Smith to date. Exchange value has been the sole focus of economics and treating nature as a virtually unlimited free good has made the discipline complicit with the capitalism that is not only NOT delivering (inequality, poverty, psychological and health effects...), but is silent when it comes to the impact of economic growth on nature. If there is a case to be made for more 'inclusive' economics, it should focus on the imminent collapse of our eco-systems and listen to those few heterodox economists who have made this their business (incidentally, they are mostly Marxists). The main solution to climate change proposed by economists - a carbon tax, cap and trade - betrays the above blindness to the role of 'negative externalities' since Smith that have brought us to the brink of disaster.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Otto Hospes Jan 19, 2020

Great article! Wonder what could be the methodological implications of this argument for using the state and its territory as units of analysis of ‘the’ economy. Prof Otto Hospes, Wageningen University.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Wail Bedawi Jan 15, 2020

Thanks for the good article. I'm an economist from the 3rd world. My point is that survey also didn't mention the discrimination against the 3rd world graduates including those who even study in the survey's country. Thanks
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Per Kurowski Jan 12, 2020

“But the focus on evidence also risks creating its own blind spots.”

Indeed, and especially so when you focus on the wrong evidence.

Since the regulators never researched what has caused all major bank crises, they based their risk weighted bank capital requirements on the perceived credit risk of assets and not on what bankers do conditioned to how they perceive the risk.
Because of that the regulators considered assets perceived as risky to be much more dangerous to our bank system, than assets perceived as safe.

http://perkurowski.blogspot.com/2016/04/here-are-17-reasons-for-why-i-believe.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Gerald O'Connell Jan 12, 2020

Unfortunately it has long been the case that whatever one's particular agenda or prejudice, it has been possible to find for hire an economist somewhere who will cloak that agenda or prejudice in a shroud of academic respectability. While that remains so the term 'profession' seems hardly applicable. Perhaps the best thing economists and economics could do is to work hard to become a profession...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jagjeet sinha Jan 12, 2020

INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE OF INCLUSIVENESS
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.
India and China are living examples of The New Model.
Since The China Model is very well known, it is The India Model that needs light.

Until 1990, India's Economics Masterminds were oblivious.
India's FX Reserves were less than $ 1 billion.
India's Stock Markets Capitalization was less than $ 10 billion.
India's External Debt was more than $ 90 billion.
Manmohan Singh had retired in Switzerland @ 60 years, without Enlightenment.
The First Family and Dynasty's Court Jesters were clueless.
Then The JP/BJP platform demolished Dynasty.
The New Finance Minister refused to toe the Congress strategy.
India's finest finance masterstroke was the 1991 Gold Swap.
Dynasty's Economics Masterminds swooped on the New Finance Minister.
Denouncing his moves to access Global Capital Markets as a sell out.
After Enlightenment of The Gold Swap 1991 - The New Model was unleashed.
The BJP came back in 1998 - and delivered the defining features of The New Model.

Thirty years later, despite scuttling by Dynasty's cronies, India 1991 Model won.
India's FX Reserves are now over $ 400 billion.
India's Stock Markets Capitalization is now over $ 2000 billion.
India's External Debt is a mere footnote, overshadowed by Market Value Creation.

The author perhaps brilliantly has explained the need for A New Worldview.
Mere monetary policy meddling may not deliver.
Value Creation has overtaken monetary policy.
Sovereign Economics was instrumental, will remain instrumental.
National Debt and Interest Rates needs to be wrapped with Value Creation.
Value Creation no longer confined to The Stock Markets but Real Estate as well.
The National Narrative built around Inclusiveness and Institutional Architecture.
Otherwise, Democracy will demolish Dynasties everywhere.
Institutional Architecture must incorporate Inclusiveness.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Abdella Abdou Jan 11, 2020

The ideas are not novel, but the events at the AEA conference seem so. Fortress AEA breached, perhaps.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Chandrashekar Tamirisa Jan 10, 2020

A brilliant article by Dani Rodrik. I had made several comments along the same lines when I was a graduate student in Applied Economics at The Johns Hopkins University and while I worked at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C. from 1998-2010. EfIP is a welcome development not only to address issues of discrimination and inequality in developed economies but for global development as a whole. We need economists who apply economic ideas and think about the political, economic and social development of their own countries and not merely of the G7. True peace can only be achieved when there is per capita global economic convergence.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/LPrK7zVru

Меняющееся лицо экономики

Subscribe to PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

Меняющееся лицо экономики

Subscribe to PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification