On the Problems of Normative Economics

2007 ◽  
pp. 59-72
Author(s):  
I. Lavrov

The author considers theoretical, philosophical and methodological aspects of normative approach in economic theory. The article discusses normative analysis and types of normative and positive elements in economic theory, basing upon difference between abstract and real objects of science. The specific traits of generations as subjects of economic and socio-political history are determined.

2016 ◽  
pp. 128-140
Author(s):  
D. Kadochnikov

Economic theory of language policy treats a language as an economic phenomenon. A language situation is considered to be an economic, or market, situation, while language policy becomes an element of economic policies. The paper aims to systematize and to further develop theoretical and methodological aspects of this promising research field situated between economics and sociolinguistics.


Author(s):  
Robert Sugden

Chapter 4 reviews ‘behavioural welfare economics’—the approach to normative analysis that is favoured by most behavioural economists. This approach assumes that people have context-independent ‘true’ or ‘latent’ preferences which, because of psychologically-induced errors, are not always revealed in actual choices. Behavioural welfare economics aims to reconstruct latent preferences by identifying and removing the effects of error on decisions, and to design policies to satisfy those preferences. Its implicit model of human agency is of an ‘inner rational agent’ that interacts with the world through an imperfect psychological ‘shell’. I argue that there is no satisfactory evidence to support this model, and no credible psychological foundation for it. Since the concept of true preference has no empirical content, the idea that such preferences can be reconstructed is a mirage. Normative economics needs to be more radical in giving up rationality assumptions.


Author(s):  
Robert Sugden

Normative analysis in economics has usually aimed at satisfying individuals’ preferences. Its conclusions have supported a long-standing liberal tradition of economics that values economic freedom and views markets favourably. However, behavioural research shows that individuals’ preferences, as revealed in choices, are often unstable, and vary according to contextual factors that seem irrelevant for welfare. The Community of Advantage proposes a reformulation of normative economics that is compatible with what is now known about the psychology of choice. Other such reformulations have assumed that people have well-defined ‘latent’ preferences which, because of psychologically-induced errors, are not always revealed in actual choices. According to these reformulations, the economist’s job is to reconstruct latent preferences and to design policies to satisfy them. The argument of this book is that latent preference and error are psychologically ungrounded concepts, and that economics needs to be more radical in giving up rationality assumptions. The book advocates a kind of normative economics that does not use the concept of preference. Its recommendations are addressed, not to an imagined ‘social planner’, but to citizens, viewed as potential parties to mutually beneficial agreements. Its normative criterion is the provision of opportunities for individuals to participate in voluntary transactions. Using this approach, many of the normative conclusions of the liberal tradition are reconstructed. It is argued that a well-functioning market economy is an institution that individuals have reason to value, whether or not their preferences satisfy conventional axioms of rationality, and that individuals’ motivations in such an economy can be cooperative rather than self-interested.


2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
FABRÍCIO MISSIO ◽  
FREDERICO G. JAYME JR. ◽  
JOSÉ LUÍS OREIRO

This paper examines the structuralist tradition in economics, emphasizing the role that structures play in the economic growth of developing countries. Since the subject at hand is evidently too large to cover in a single article, an emphasis has been brought to bear upon the macroeconomic elements of such a tradition, while also exploring its methodological aspects. It begins by analysing some general aspects of structuralism in economics (its evolution and origins) associated with ECLAC thought, in this instance focusing on the dynamics of the center-periphery relationship. Thereafter, the macroeconomic structuralism derived from the works of Taylor (1983, 1991) is presented, followed by a presentation of neo-structuralism. Centred on the concept of systemic competitiveness, this approach defines a strategy to achieve the high road of globalization, understood here as an inevitable process in spite of its engagement being dependent on the policies adopted. The conclusions show the genuine contributions of this tradition to economic theory.


2009 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 596-619
Author(s):  
Richard Carter

AbstractThe author uses a Public Choice approach to analyze the evolution of the political structures of Canadian society and the options facing Canadian society today. The insights provided by a positive approach as opposed to the traditional normative approach are discussed. The records of economic and political history are used to validate the insights provided by this economic approach.


1997 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Arnsperger

Ronald Dworkin's (1981) theory of equality of resources draws heavily on conceptual tools developed in economic theory. His criterion for a just distribution of resources is closely connected with two economic ideas: first, the idea that a distribution of resources reflects a concern for equality if it is envy-free; second, the idea that such an envy-free distribution of resources is attainable as a competitive equilibrium from equal split. The objective of this paper is to show that the criterion of equality of resources has been misinterpreted by normative economics, largely due to Dworkin's own lack of precision, and that it needs to be reformulated in order to be intelligible. The dimensions along which the reformulation is needed concern (1) the nature of the preferences used in what Dworkin calls the ‘envy test’ and (2) the nature of the envy test itself.


2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 72-78
Author(s):  
S.M. Ergin ◽  
I.V. Kopaenko

The article shows the stages of the formation and development of the theory of entrepreneurship from the inception of its initial theoretical concept and introduction in the 18th century by G. Cantillon into the economic theory of the concept of entrepreneurship. The necessity and urgency of continuing research on this theory in the context of the growing demand for entrepreneurship was formulated, which is now provided with all the opportunities to find and systematically solve socio-economic problems on the scale of the changing demands of the economy in administrative-territorial entities. It is emphasized that in modern conditions there remains a high need for the development of a number of theoretical and methodological aspects of entrepreneurship, the failure of which leads to incorrect consequences associated with the traditional interpretation of this category. Various scientific approaches to defining the essence and interpretation of the development of entrepreneurship are considered, the main functions and factors determining it are highlighted, the author’s definitions of the concepts of «entrepreneur» and «entrepreneurship» are proposed.


2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Felipe Coelho Sigrist ◽  
Solange Regina Marin

Author(s):  
Robert Sugden

Chapter 2 addresses a question that economists rarely ask when they engage in normative analysis: to whom is this analysis addressed? I argue that both neoclassical and behavioural economists usually write as if addressing an imagined ‘social planner’, conceptualized as a benevolent autocrat who agrees with them on all controversial issues. Philosophers who write about normative economics sometimes imagine instead that they are engaging in ‘public reasoning’, addressing an assembly of moral agents who are trying to decide what, all things considered, is good for people (individually and collectively). Both approaches treat normative analysis as an attempt to find a ‘view from nowhere’—an impartial view of what is good for people that is not any actual person’s view of what is good for him. But this is not the only viewpoint from which normative analysis can be made.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document