Problems with Economic Methodology

I recently read The Making of an Economist, which provides insight into the world of PhD economist. The authors, Arjo Klamer and David Colander, surveyed a few hundred students from teh top economics PhD programs in the country. Their findings were disappointing, and I hope to post some more on the current state of the economics profession, as Colander has supplemented the 1987 book with an updated analysis and an updated book.

This post will focus on some of the methodological problems of economics, which I felt Colander clearly presented in the last chapter of the book. To start it is necessary to clearly express some of the differences between what most people think of as economics and the professional academic world. To most economics is supply and demand and maybe some marginal analysis, its concepts, general theorems and ideas described in models and logic. Yet in the professional academic world its more akin to physics, utilizing highly mathematical models to test hypothesis. The questions are no longer formed by inquiry into the world but rather focus on the mathematical models ability to be used. The models prescribe the inquiry rather than inquiry itself.

In the book, Colander makes a distinction between positivism, where the focus is on knowledge gaining is a result of empirically testing well-specified hypothesis, and a sociological approach to methodology. To quote Colander,

a sociological approach does not assume that scientist are searching for truth. Truth is one of their goals, but only one; professional advancement, recognition, and wealth are other of perhaps equal or more importance.

The interviewees described this as part of their graduate studies, that they choose their dissertation on not what interests them but what will most likely get them a job at a top research school. So they are taught these mathematical models, feel its necessary to use them to do their dissertation, to get a job to teach the same mathematical models.

Colander,

Positivism says science ends with formal empirical testing; if formal empirical testing is impossible, no science is possible. A sociological approach says that science does not end with formal empirical testing-that there are reasonable ways of processing information upon which people can agree.

So that’s one of the problems of the discipline’s methodology-the focus on the things that are empirically testable through well-specified hypothesis. Unfortunately some of the most interesting questions of life aren’t easily well-specified. The graduate students interviewed expressed interest in the pursuit of truth, but felt limited and dis-empowered by spending so much time mastering constrained optimization and econometric modeling which give them tools that can only be used for certain questions. They should have the opportunity to learn how to go about the search for truth with as many reasonable tools as possible.

Colander position of utilizing a sociological approach to methodology makes sense in fact its in line with economist’s own views of others,

Positivism assumes individuals search for the truth, even if it is not in their self-interest. The sociological approach that I use, paradoxically, assumes scientist are the same type of rational beings that neoclassical economics assumes all people are. to be a neoclassical economist whose methodology is positivism is to be inconsistent.

The up-side is that there are plenty of economist who understand the limitations of positivism. The discipline continues to evolve and change. I think the next step is for it to better appreciate a more multi-discipline approach with a sociological approach to methodology.

chalk-board
There’s much more to share about The Becoming of an Economist, but it must be returned to the library. I hope to read the redux soon.

Share

Smoke Stack on the Back of Government Programs

I was just watching an interview with Milton Friedman and he stated that,

There is a smoke stack on the back of every government program. That is to say that every government programs impose a cost on third parties where the third parties are not receiving compensation.

This came out of the context of discussing when government may need to intervene in the market. Milton Friedman and some other classical liberals (libertarians) think that the only case for government is when it is not feasible for market arrangements to make individuals pay another individual when harm is imposed on the that second individual. Requiring contractual parties to pay third parties, outside of the contractual agreement, who are harmed by the agreement, compensation for that harm.

After Milton Friedman made this point he brought up the concept of a smoke stack on the backs of every government program. That while it is important to consider these situations where government may intervene, it is also important be realistic about the ‘smoke stacks’ that will be turned on as a result of utilizing the government.

He also mentioned Terry Anderson and PERC who has shown that often private arrangements are better for the environment than ‘command and control’ government regulation.

Watch the interview yourself.

Share

US Steelmakers Support Green House Gas Legislation

carbon-cap-fedderman

I came across the group ‘The Cap Solution‘ through a few different avenues, energy industry related research, at the public library as an advertisement in the front hall, and at the local farmers market on a bulletin board. The Cap Solution is consortium of the Environmental Defense Fund, the Blue/Green Alliance, and the United Steel Workers.

Here’s what they stand for:

The cap solution in a nutshell

Capping carbon pollution encourages the growth of renewable energy and energy-efficient industries. It brings customers to these businesses, which in turn will create good jobs and help revitalize American towns.

They are correct that it will encourage the growth of renewable energy as a GHG cap will increase the costs of traditional generation (e.g., coal and natural gas). I’m not sure if it will create jobs, as that assumes the jobs lost from the coal and natrual gas generation sector will be more than replaced by jobs associated with ‘green energy’. Their logic does fully fall apart with the comment that a GHG cap will, “revitalize American towns.”

Let’s explore this logic a bit further:

New jobs americans can do tomorrow

Take the wind turbine. It’s a machine. Americans are good at machines. A typical wind turbine has 8,000 parts and is made of 250 tons of steel. Somebody’s got to make that steel, fabricate those parts, assemble those parts, deliver the assembled turbine to a wind farm, erect the turbine and manage the wind farm. That’s a lot of jobs right in the American workers’ sweet spot. And this is just one example. A Carbon Cap will create demand for energy efficient windows, LED lighting, ball bearings for turbines and thousands of other products.

So here is where I strongly disagree with their logic. If we implement a GHG cap we increase the price of manufacturing in the US, particularly the cost of manufacturing energy intensive products. Steel is energy intensive. So while we increase the costs of doing business and producing steel and India and China do not increase the costs, they become more competitive in the market and thus will be most likely the producers of the new wind turbines. In fact this article, claims that China will be the biggest producer of wind turbines in 2009. So why, in particular, is the United Steelworkers supporting this legislation. Well as an economist I tend to think of incentives, what is it that the United Steelworkers like, what reward would they possibly seek…protectionism.

This can be seen by the Cap Solution’s simple sentence:

And by starting now, we’ll make sure these products are made here and exported all over the world. Instead of becoming more products we have to import.

In fact the United Steelworkers couldn’t get any trade complaints passed through the Bush administration so their hoping for some traction with Obama (particular since he pledged to increase trade enforcement). They are currently trying to get ‘trade enforcement’ considerations by Obama on imported Chinese tires (see article).

Its unfortunate that the environmental leadership in our country can’t make the connection between increased costs of production and the health of our economy, and how the health of our economy allows us to purchase environmental services (e.g., pollution control and preservation). I also find that most people forget that the reason we get to even consider worrying about GHG is that we have a high standard of living. I fear that our ability to worry about GHG, our high standard of living, will erode as we start to turn our worries into policies. Policies that increase the costs of doing business in the U.S., while not simultaneously increasing the cost of doing business in other countries, putting all of us at a competitive disadvantage.

This group, waiting in line for free food for unemployed, aren’t waiting in line to volunteer for a non-profit, or learn about environmental degradation, they’re unemployed and employment and security definitely come before environmental protection.

Share

Swine Flu Humor

pooh

I came across this via an email chain and thought it worth sharing. I had to travel over the last few days and was surprised at how many places now have a huge bottle of hand sanitizer on their counter. In fact I visited a perspective client and the security guard rubbed Purrell all over our badges before handing them to me. I understand precaution, but the badge attaches to my suit, and I tend not to chew on it, at least when it is a perspective client.

Share

Current Book Club – The Theory of Moral Sentiments

I am currently reading “The Theory of Moral Sentiments” by Adam Smith and listening to a series of Podcasts via EconTalk with Russ Roberts and Daniel Klien at George Mason University.

The Theory of Moral Sentiments provides a background on the moral foundations further elaborated within “The Wealth of Nations.”

In Episode II of this set of Podcasts Klein and Roberts discussed two types of virtues Smith elaborates on (1) the amiable (gentle, indulgent, and compassionate) and the (2) the respectable (self-denial, self-government, dignity, and honor).

Klein thought of this as a spiral where there is the disintegration of the self (need for compassion compassion, internal multiplicities, and conflict) and then the bottom of the spiral there is a re-integration where the different feelings and conflicts are integrated into a person.

To elaborate further, this isn’t a one-way street, there is a movement down the spiral while you feel more conflict and multiplicity and then back up the spiral as you are either forced to change or need become sick of being so controlled (so stable and fully integrated).

I found this very interesting as I think most people feel different pulls and then integrate and then feel different pulls and then integrate again. Klein and Roberts then go into how this dance of the two virtues outlined by Smith increase our ability to be socially connected with each other.

Good Stuff.

Klein on The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Episode 2–A Discussion of Part I | EconTalk | Library of Economics and Liberty.

morality-freethought-large

Technorati Tags: , ,

Share

Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009

I just drafted and sent a letter to my Congressman (Lacy Clay). The letter is provided below as are links on HR 1207 (Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009). It basically requires the Comptroller of the Currency to conduct an audit of the Federal Reserve by the end of 2010.

HR 1207 ‘Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009′ has been refereed to the House Financial Services Committee, of which you are a member.

I think this act is extremely important to the residents of St. Louis. As a response to the recent financial crisis the Federal Reserve has acted quickly and decisively. In this environment it is essential for the actions of the Federal Reserve to be understood an analyzed closely. The current US code limits the authority of the Comptroller of the Currency to audit the Federal Reserve effectively. HR 1207 will allow for the Comptroller to complete a full audit by removing the limitations set forth in section 714 of title 31, United States Code.

As a professional economist with a masters in economics I understand the dynamics between the Federal Reserve and the health of our economy. Sound monetary policy which is transparent and beneficial in the long run is essential to a stable economic system. Chairman Bernanke, prior to his current position, supported increased transparency of the Federal Reserve, although his recent attempts at limiting transparency have gone against his own prescriptions.

I urge you to support HR 1207. At the most we will gain a better understanding of the Federal Reserve and at a minimum send a signal to the Federal Reserve that we as a citizenry are becoming more aware of the importance of sound policy by the Federal Reserve.

Sincerely,

John D Taylor

HR 1207 (Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009)

Technorati Tags: ,

Share

Taxation for All

This is a great opinion article in the NY Times (Link) on the current taxation system in our country.

Everyone now has a sacred cow in the tax code. For my money, the most sacred thing of all is our country and its growth, but the sacred cows have turned into a pack of wolves. On both the spending and the tax side, the wolves are devouring our children’s future.

Ari Fleischer seems to have a good even headed plan on taxes.

It’s time to create an Economic Growth Code whose purpose is to fix and grow the economy, not redistribute massive amounts of wealth. A new tax code that creates growth and reforms our entitlement system is the only way to dig our way out of the hole we’re in.

Technorati Tags: ,

Share

Blogging as a “Regression-to-the-mean Synthesis”

I came across Ben Canocha’s blog (Link) via Marginal Revolution (Link) and was intrigued by Ben’s idea that, “the “you” that emerges on a personal blog represents a regression-to-the-mean synthesis, which may represent the most natural version of yourself.”

Interesting concept about personal and professional masks and the ability of a blog to encompass and bridge various masks. (Link to Ben’s Post ‘Most Natural “You” Emerges When Masks Collapse’)

Share