scholarly journals Interdependent preferences and policy stances in mainstream economics

2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Claveau

An individual's preferences are interdependent when they can be influenced by the behaviour of other agents. This paper analyzes the internal dynamics of an approach in contemporary economics allowing for interdependent preferences, the extended utility approach (EUA), which presents itself as a mild reform of neoclassical economics. I contend that this approach succeeds in broadening the policy perspectives of mainstream economics by challenging neoclassical policy stances. However, this success comes with a limitation: the EUA is unable to supply new consensual policy stances as alternatives to the challenged ones. The reason for this limitation is that the EUA opens the possibility of a wide variety of specifications for the utility function, and policy conclusions are sensitive to the details of these specifications.

1992 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G. Abler

The paper by Taylor has merit because it is provocative, but like many things, this can be overdone. His self-described diatribe against neoclassical economics is in special need of a response. He appears to dismiss the notion of utility maximization, but in fact there is nothing to dismiss. Although many economists do not realize this fact, the assumption of utility maximization is not testable. Give me any pattern of behavior by an individual (or a society) and I can give you a utility function which, when maximized subject to whatever constraints that person or society may face, yields the observed behavior. An obvious example would be U = 1 for the observed behavior and U = 0 otherwise, although more complicated examples could also be constructed. The power of economics lies not in utility maximization, but in the specification of constraints on choice and in describing how changes in the constraints affect behavior. To illustrate, even a consumer who made decisions randomly would tend to have downward-sloping demand curves because of his or her budget constraint (Becker).


2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
DARRELL ARNOLD ◽  
FRANK P. MAIER-RIGAUD

Abstract:The article briefly introduces Hans Albert and the basic elements of his critique of neoclassical economics as a form of ‘model Platonism’. The two most important elements of his general methodological critique of economics – namely the institutional vacuum inherent in much economic modelling and its unrealistic assumptions about behaviour – are introduced. It is argued that these specific critiques have been taken up with varying degrees of success in areas of economic research such as institutional economics and in behavioural and experimental research programmes. However, the fundamental methodological gist of his critique remains as pertinent to mainstream economics as it was when originally formulated. The influence of ‘model Platonic’ thinking remains pervasive in academia and also in public policy.


Author(s):  
Ilkben Akansel

Since different kinds of economics thoughts have been explored, few have been as peculiar as Old Institutional Economics (OIE) and New Institutional Economics (NIE). It is curious that almost every stream criticizing mainstream economics has a left wing. OIE, not a big fan of this, criticizes neoclassical economics/mainstream economics, given it arose in the US. OIE had no sense to left wing, on the contrary, it created an effect criticizing neoclassical economics in its core. Unlike OIE, NIE has many common points with neoclassical economics. NIE has several new aspects different from neoclassical economics, as it has chosen a completely different path than OIE. In this chapter, authors scrutinize circumstances that led to OIE, and what separated OIE and NIE. A brief, successively historical aspect is also provided.


Author(s):  
Philip Mirowski ◽  
Edward Nik-Khah

One of the most important contributions of the Cowles Commission in the period 1944 to 1954 was to jump-start the formalization of the orthodox approach to the economics of information. The tension with the neoliberals also housed at the University of Chicago was fruitful. Members such as Jacob Marschak, Leonid Hurwicz, Kenneth Arrow, and Stanley Reiter all struggled to infuse the utility function with some sort of cognitive capacity. Their struggles to make this do political double-duty set the stage for the subsequent evolution of the economics of information.


2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
John B. Davis

David Colander argued to this Society two years ago that the term “neoclassical economics” ought to be declared dead (Colander 2000). I concur with him on the verdict, but do so for different reasons. Colander's argument was that neoclassicism possessed six primary attributes, and much of mainstream economics cannot be characterized in these terms. My argument is simpler. It is that neoclassical economics was primarily a theory of the human individual in economic life (albeit a flawed one), but contemporary mainstream economics does not possess a theory of the human individual. This conclusion may not surprise those who have reflected on the rise of formalism in economics in the postwar period. But for two reasons I think it important to emphasize the disappearance of a theory of the individual from economics. First, because neoclassicism implemented and defended for nearly a century one particular philosophical conception of the individual central to western thought since the Enlightenment, the abandonment of this commitment by mainstream economics is an important part of our understanding of its evolution and its relation to social thinking generally. Second, the demise of the individual in mainstream economics is also significant because, having abandoned the individual, mainstream economics is no longer capable of offering a defense of the individual in contemporary society. Indeed its project, I will suggest, is in important respects anti-individualist. It may be naïve on my part to think contemporary society still engaged in a defense of the individual. Nonetheless, I hold that thinking about the individual remains fundamental to how many people think about the social world, and that consequently mainstream economics' abandonment of the individual may render it historically irrelevant, perhaps contributing to its fragmentation and dissolution as an identifiable approach in economics. Thus the important conclusion to draw may not be Colander's: that we have seen the death of neoclassical economics. It may be that at issue today is the death of mainstream economics.


2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Morel

The principal concern of this paper is with the need of a theoretical shift in economics for analyzing and devising efficient and innovative policy reforms to combat employment insecurity. Mainstream economics is unable to provide appropriate theorizing about economic phenomena, including economic insecurity. Thus, we must turn to economic theories which radically question the dominant paradigm in economics. John Rogers Commons's institutionalist theory accomplishes that. First, the author of this paper outlines the distinctive character of this theory by presenting some of its crucial methodological differences with neoclassical economics. Second, she explains how economic insecurity is conceptualized as an "instituted" process with this theory of institution. A better mastery of this specific school of thought in economics appears to escape the problems met by mainstream economics by proposing a real theoretical alternative for the development of a truly evolutionary, trans-disciplinary and ethical economic theory.


Author(s):  
Xi Chen ◽  
Ali E. Abbas ◽  
Dusˇan M. Stipanovic´

This paper introduces the multiattribute utility theory to the control Lyapunov function design framework. As an illustration we focus on the problem of multi-target assignment. With this formulation, we use a global multiattribute utility function as a multivariate objective function that should be minimized for the agents to achieve their objectives. The objectives represent deviations of each agent from specified targets. We provide closed form feedback control laws, based on the multiattribute utility function, for general nonlinear multi-agent system models affine in control. Finally, we present simulation results and conduct sensitivity analysis for two different models that are affine in control; basic kinematic model and nonlinear nonholonomic unicycle model.


2021 ◽  
pp. 096228022199596
Author(s):  
Kim May Lee ◽  
J Jack Lee

Bayesian adaptive randomization is a heuristic approach that aims to randomize more patients to the putatively superior arms based on the trend of the accrued data in a trial. Many statistical aspects of this approach have been explored and compared with other approaches; yet only a limited number of works has focused on improving its performance and providing guidance on its application to real trials. An undesirable property of this approach is that the procedure would randomize patients to an inferior arm in some circumstances, which has raised concerns in its application. Here, we propose an adaptive clip method to rectify the problem by incorporating a data-driven function to be used in conjunction with Bayesian adaptive randomization procedure. This function aims to minimize the chance of assigning patients to inferior arms during the early time of the trial. Moreover, we propose a utility approach to facilitate the selection of a randomization procedure. A cost that reflects the penalty of assigning patients to the inferior arm(s) in the trial is incorporated into our utility function along with all patients benefited from the trial, both within and beyond the trial. We illustrate the selection strategy for a wide range of scenarios.


Author(s):  
Ilkben Akansel

Economics and philosophy has a deep connection. It sometimes intertwined with each other whether economics needs philosophy or not. Philosophy of economics is a neccessity in order to understand the circumstances behind the economics events. Comprehension of such a neccessity can be complicated on certain occasions because of neoclassical economics thought. Neoclassical economics is also described as mainstream economics. This has long been a debate that critisizes mainstream economics. All followers critisizing mainstream economics are characterized as heterodox economics. Two of the fundemantal heterodox economics concepts are institutional economics and feminist economics. This study will therefore scrutinize mainstream economics in terms of the idea of old institutional economics and feminist economics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document