Art Of Economics Research Articles

Mainstream Economics and Conventional Environmental Policies

Mainstream Economics and Conventional Environmental Policies

Inclusive development of Ukraine in the context of economic ontology

The purpose of the study is to determine the compliance of existing scientific ideas on the inclusive development of Ukraine with the fundamental principles of economic ontology and justification of the conditions and ways of the transition of Ukrainian society to the principles of inclusiveness. The attention of the domestic and foreign scientific community is focused on the study of various aspects of inclusive development. At present, the number of non-holistic publications has reached a critical mass, which has led to an urgent need for works of a generalizing nature. One of these areas related to the methodology of inclusive development is economic ontology – a scientific field whose task is to clarify the relevance of ideas about the inclusiveness of society to the real state of affairs in it. The scientific novelty of the study is to compare inclusive development with the following ontological dimensions: economic reality (basic structures, forces, mechanisms, and trends that determine its content and forms), economic activity (economic resources and institutions), the art of economics (economic policy). In this context, the inclusive development of Ukraine is positioned as a certain state and mode of functioning of society, characterized by organic unity and common interests of the entire human community in its movement towards ensuring expanded reproduction. The proposed approach to the methodology of economic ontology is based on identifying the conformity of ideas about the nature and content of inclusive development of the country reflected in scientific discourse and the basic principles of economic ontology. According to the results of the study, certain problems with the quality of economic resources, institutions, and policies were detected, which complicate the process of transition of Ukrainian society to the principles of inclusiveness. The conditions and ways of creating an inclusive environment within the rural-urban space (united territorial communities, new administrative districts) are substantiated.

Where Economics Went Wrong: A Review Essay

In their recent book, Where Economics Went Wrong, David Colander and Craig Freedman (2019) argue that economics went wrong when it abandoned the Classical liberal firewall that demanded separation of scientific theory from the art of policy making. Colander has long advanced the idea that applied economics should be classified neither as positive nor as normative economics. Instead, it should be placed in a third category, “the art of economics”; art requires vision and acumen in addition to knowledge and technique, and is thus more akin to engineering than the natural sciences. The primary contribution of Where Economics Went Wrong is thus to advance Colander’s general argument through the specific story of Chicago economics. This essay make two interconnected claims. First, while I agree with Colander and Freedman that applied economics would benefit from more art and less calculation, the Chicago school is not the best vehicle by which to tell a convincing story. Second, a thicker history of the Chicago school reminds us of the importance of institutions and rules, not only for understanding the economy but also for thinking about how economists have constructed our discipline and how internal institutions and incentives affect our behavioral choices. ( JEL A11, B20, B41, B52)

Where Economics Went Wrong: A Review Essay

In their recent book Where Economics Went Wrong, David Colander and Craig Freedman (2018) argue that economics went wrong when it abandoned the Classical liberal firewall that demanded separation of scientific theory from the art of policy making. Colander has long advanced the idea that applied economics should be classified neither as positive nor as normative economics. Instead it should be placed in a third category, “the art of economics;” art requires vision and acumen in addition to knowledge and technique, and is thus more akin to engineering than the natural sciences. The primary contribution of Where Economics Went Wrong is thus to advance Colander’s general argument through the specific story of Chicago Economics. This essay make two interconnected claims. First, while I agree with Colander and Freedman that applied economics would benefit from more art and less calculation, the Chicago School is not the best vehicle by which to tell a convincing story. Second, a thicker history of the Chicago School reminds us of the importance of institutions and rules, not only for understanding the economy but also for thinking about how economists have constructed our discipline and how internal institutions and incentives affect our behavioral choices.

The behavioral turn in development economics: a tentative account through the lens of economic methodology

ABSTRACT This paper aims to provide an interpretation of why behavioral economics has come into the complex field of development economics that draws on insights from methodology of economics. We engage in an extensive survey of the literature that focuses on the actual practice of “behavioral development economics and behavioral economics view of poverty” that emerged in the early years of the 21st century in order to identify and discuss some directions and implications that this movement might carry for economics science and art of Economics.

Less than Friends, More than Acquaintances: Artists, Markets and Gallery Openings in New York

Abstract This article describes one way that unknown and ‘emerging’ artists with limited exhibition history or reputation take steps towards developing their careers. Artists cannot apply directly for exhibition opportunities, therefore they develop social associations with gallerists that are described as being ‘kind-of-friendly-with’. Using a descriptive ethnographic narrative drawn from a case study of artists as they navigate an evening of commercial gallery openings in New York’s Chelsea district, it is argued that establishing a career in contemporary visual art depends on the ability to render one’s self visible to other participants in an art world. Rather than viewing the symbolic value of artworks as antagonistic with the economic art market, artists seek to establish social associations in which different forms of value are interrelated. In conclusion it is suggested that this is an art world in which the ‘economic world reversed’ is inversed.

GARY BECKER AND THE ART OF ECONOMICS

Gary Becker, an American economist, died on May 3, 2014, at the age of 83. His major contribution was the systematic application of economics to the analysis of social issues. He used economics to study discrimination, criminal behavior, human capital, marriage, fertility and other social issues.

Value Co-Creation in Services: An Economic Perception on the State of the Art in Economics, I.C.T. vs. Marketing

Abstract The World Trade Organization (WTO) states that almost two-thirds of the global output produced and almost 20 percent of the global trade accounts for the upcoming “service sector”. Since many products now are transformed into services, the old fashioned dichotomy between product and service has been replaced by the current service - product continuum business function. In pure economics, it was quite safe, so far, that the output produced “Q”, represented by famous production function(s) (i.e. Cobb-Douglas) would be a tangible good. Now the production of services displays the same level of diversity pending upon capital intensity, level of innovation and growth prospects. A service system can be defined as a dynamic value co-creation scheme of combined resources that creates and delivers value. Two service systems are shortly analyzed here, e-health and tourism services. We conclude upon the needed quantification of the value co-creation process, in order to produce concrete experimental outcomes, in terms of the positive scientific foundations of economics, thus affecting the economic efficiency of service production, along the lines of transaction cost economics.

The role of experts in the methodology of economics

Is subjective expert judgment a source of evidence in economics? In this paper, I will argue that it is, on a par with other sources like modeling, statistics, experimental, etc. I will also argue that it is not derivative, that is, reducible to the previous ones. But what is exactly the role of experts in economics? The contribution to the current methodological debate that I propose not only takes the role of expertise in economics as indispensable, but also suggests a need for a methodology associated with that role. I defend an indispensability argument, and indirectly David Colander's plea for refocusing the methodological debate on the lost art of economics. Finally, I indicate where to look for guidelines in formulating a methodology of economic expertise.

John M. Virgo: A Career Spent in Service to the Development of the Science and Art of Economics

When John M. Virgo sat at his desk in his office at Virginia Commonwealth University in 1972, it is unlikely that he thought that he would devote his entire career to the development of the International Atlantic Economic Society (IAES), an organization that would publish two journals and hold two conferences dedicated to the development and dissemination of research on and related to the various fields that comprise the science and art of economics.

Beyond the positive–normative dichotomy: some remarks on Colander's Lost Art of Economics

In a series of articles later collected in his book The Lost Art of Economics, David Colander argues that the dichotomous distinction of positive and normative economics has misled economists into treating applied policy economics as part of positive economics and hence adopting the methodology of positive economics for applied policy analysis. Colander therefore urges a reintroduction of the art of economics and calls for a serious discussion on the appropriate methodology for applied policy work. This paper first explores some points not thoroughly examined by Colander in his arguments regarding the art of economics, in particular on its scope and the nature of judgements in the art of economics. It then examines the potential challenges to the tripartite division of economics, the presupposition of Colander's arguments for the art of economics, by examining, respectively, Tony Lawson's and Daniel Hausman's discussion on positive economics as a separate body of knowledge.

Economics: Art and / or Science

The article provides methodological analysis of applied economic knowledge and its relationships with theoretical knowledge. Stages in the history of these relationships are identified. The article considers in detail methodological ideas of J. S. Mill and J. N. Keynes (who proposed the "art of economics" as a part of economic science). The paper also analyzes epistemological features of applied economics. The author states that economic science was from the beginning tightly connected with practice. In the analysis of applied economics the author emphasizes the art of economics as the faculty to select and combine scientific knowledge to solve concrete problems. This specific field of knowledge, according to the author, should play an important role not only within modern academic discourse in Russia, but also within the system of higher education.

Exploring Values in the Classroom: Three Exercises for Introductory Economics

We present three classroom exercises designed to explore issues of fairness and equity in economics. In each exercise, students put economics in context as they consider the art of economics in addition to the science. The active learning nature of the exercises involves students as they consider (1) the free-rider problem, (2) the contrast between democratic and free-market ideals, and (3) externalities. Each exercise, including discussion, will fit into a 50-minute class period. The author has used the exercises in introductory microeconomics courses, in classes of 30 to 50 students.

The Lost Art of Economics: Essays on Economics and the Economics Profession

The Lost Art of Economics: Essays on Economics and the Economics Profession

Comment intégrer l'économie comparative dans l'économie ?

This analysis of leading research programs in comparative economics also assesses their actual and potential functions in the economist's toolkit. Among the explicitly comparative programs are those having taken a traditional approach to Comparative Economic Systems (in particular the versions of T. Koopmans and J. Montias or of E. Neuberger and W. Duffy) and the recent approach via a Comparative Institutional Analysis (A. Greif and M. Aoki). Among the implicitly comparative programs are those having to do with German "Ordoliberalism" (initiated by W. Eucken) and, more recently, French regulation theory. Comparative economics is analyzed from the perspective of Eucken's "great antinomy" with its controversial implications about the nature of economic knowledge. The issues date back to the late 19th-century Methodenstreit, even though an adequate response to them is still on the agenda. Most modern economic theory depends very much on the ceteris paribus clause. To decrease this dependence, economics should take the comparative research strategy seriously. A methodological analysis of comparative economics turns up a few overlooked but crucial epis- temological points (in particular the heuristic function of ideal-types) essential to economic inquiry. Comparative economics is indispensable for bridging the gaps between theoretical and empirical inquiry, and between the science and art of economics.

Correspondence

Correspondence and response regarding: The Lost Art of Economics

Retrospectives: The Lost Art of Economics

Economists generally divide economics into two distinct categories—positive and normative— but how applied economics fits within these categories is unclear. This paper argues that applied economics belongs in neither normative nor positive economics; instead it belongs in a third category—the art of economics. Currently, many economists are trying to use a methodology appropriate for positive economics to guide their applied work, work that properly belongs in the art of economics. This three-part distinction is not mine, but dates back to a classic book, The Scope and Method of Political Economy (1891) by John Neville Keynes. In his book, Keynes argued that economists' failure to distinguish the art of economics as a separate branch from positive and normative economics would lead to serious problems. One hundred years later, he has turned out to be clairvoyant.

The History of Art And The Art in Economics

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsRick Szostak* Department of Economics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2H4. Dr. Szostak’s first book was The Role of Transportation in the Industrial Revolution (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1991). He has recently completed a 360 page manuscript titled Technological Innovation and the Great Depression. The present article is adapted from a hundred page manuscript entitled “Econ-Art: A Connoisseur’s Guide” (April 1992). The author would like to thank Steve Gregory, Craig Freedman, Peter Kriesler, John Perkins, Alex Blair, Frank Barry and Roberta Ryan for advice and encouragement.

Marginal Employment Subsidies Again: A Brief Response to Whitley and Wilson

We are grateful to Whitley and Wilson both for investigating our proposed Marginal Employment Subsidy (MES) using a full-scale macro model and for correcting our arithmetic. With reference to the latter point first of all, luckily the revised numbers are not too different as a comparison of the first two columns of their Table i indicates, although they do demonstrate the superiority of computers to pencil and paper. Interestingly enough, under the revised figures the budget deficit cost per job of the MES is dramatically reduced, making it rather more desirable than we had originally supposed. This improvement is, however, more apparent than real since the budget-deficit effect is the difference between two very large and almost equal numbers (see the formula in LN). A small change in the assumption concerning, for example, the marginal rate of corporation tax makes a lot of difference. We are severely taken to task by Whitley and Wilson for asserting that the current state of the art in economics renders it impossible to analyse the policy effects in the context of a fully dynamic model. What we meant by this was not that we consider the existing UK macroeconomic models to be unsuitable but that there exists no theoretical dynamic macro model which commands wide enough support among economists to enable us to generate dynamic responses which would convince more than a small proportion of the profession. This absence of consensus does, in fact, spill over into the empirical models as well in the sense that with the key wage equation, for example, the difference in specification across the various large models is very large indeed and generates very different responses to certain types of policy, particularly in the short run. Concerning the conclusion of Whitley and Wilson that MES is only slightly superior to a non-marginal employment subsidy (NMES) (e.g. a cut in National Insurance) a reading of both papers makes it crystal clear that the important difference between us is in the impact of such a policy on price taking exporters. There are two points to be made here. First, export equations of the type which appear to have been used by Whitley and Wilson, which are specified in terms of prices but which omit costs, are obviously mis-specified with regard to the price taking sector since they cannot capture the essential supply behaviour of the price taking firm. Second, and perhaps more important, even an equation which in addition incorporates profits or better still relative labour costs (e.g. the Treasury model) cannot help us discriminate between a marginal versus average subsidy since the measures of profitability or labour costs which are used are average rather than marginal concepts. Since the average subsidy of an MES is the same as that for an NMES, use of an export equation specified [ 88I ]

Conflicts Over Changes in Scarcity: An Economic Approach

F WE KNEW how to arrive at social unity freely and openly, we would have the key to a Good Society. If reasoning could reconcile the ideologies that divide men, there would be some hope for discussion achieving the desired goal, but talk does not, as a rule, bring about social unity. Frank Knight said it succinctly: more intelligent people are, the more certain they are to disagree on matters of social principles and policy, and the more acute will be the disagreement. Not knowing how to reconcile differences in values and beliefs, the art of economics is to conceal these differences. It is done so astutely that we come to see only social unity. Our models are virtually foolproof in immunizing graduate students against the divisiveness of Marx, Veblen, and Commons and other mavericks. But despite our protective apparatus the conflicts that divide people persist. Marx was wrong, however, in his belief that governments would wither away under his economic system. Veblen's property owning leisure class has come to count for less and less, as high wages and salaries have come to dominate personal incomes. The legal foundations of property, the hallmark of Commons' approach, have also diminished in economic importance. The virtual elimination of private property and of class distinctions, as announced in principle by the governments of China and the Soviet Union, has not led to social unity within or between them. Our own foreign policy of imposing political unity within other countries has been anything but successful. Nor are we spared disunity within the United States; consider, only, such recent divisive issues as the environment, pollution, energy, and discrimination. Intellectually there is a woeful lack of comprehension of the universality of the struggles for scarce resources. It is as old as human life, reaching back far beyond known history. Nor are animals spared as is clear from their struggle for territorial rights. Struggle for existence of the members of any natural population is the mainspring of Darwinian evolution. Economic competition in accordance with established rules is one part of this struggle. Although it is true that the sources of conflicts that divide people and the changes in them over time are exceedingly hard to comprehend, especially so for economists who hold fast to a consistent unified system of preferences, we could do much better than this by extending the domain of economic analysis. How useful such extensions would be is not predictable, but there are good reasons for giving them a try. Human conflicts are not occasional events; on the contrary, they are as universal and persistent as resource scarcities. Both are basic attributes