tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post826929548933984682..comments2024-03-09T10:26:48.789+00:00Comments on economics, psychology, policy: Common Sense Economics or just Economics?Emma Watsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11466193733741012673noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-58673478227756672972010-05-06T10:38:48.418+00:002010-05-06T10:38:48.418+00:00Humanomics and Human Economics are nice tries but ...Humanomics and Human Economics are nice tries but they sound vaguely occult and I wouldn't fancy trying to fly under that flag. The challenge from my point of view is to walk into a room full of people who think that economics is solely about forecasting inflation and exchange rates and convince them that it is now far broader and far more interdisciplinary. Calling it social science is not going to work because many of them are programmed to think of Economics as being the discipline that deals with economic policy questions. <br /><br />I don't agree with Gerard's cynicism. In Ireland, we have such enormous problems in the future financing of health and pensions and a range of other issues that sovereign survival will require smarter policy. As Keynes pointed out, the state needs to understand the psychology of markets to continue to exist. We have had a soft budget constraint in Ireland for the last 20 years and now we have to develop tougher and more nuanced policies. <br /><br />Though I do agree with Gerard that private groups offer a quicker way of hammering some of these ideas into the real world. I will be talking about this at BizCamp in Limerick on Saturday.Liam Delaneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04905424104233324535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-75371933208987911682010-05-06T07:55:06.363+00:002010-05-06T07:55:06.363+00:00Liam
I think there are 3 questions in this. The f...Liam<br /><br />I think there are 3 questions in this. The first question is related to the content and boundaries of the field, the second relating to its name/brand, the third relating to how to spread its use. A marketer could have a field day with this.. You’ve got all the classic questions of defining the product, branding it, placing and promoting it. The only marketing question you’ve left out is how to price it (how much are BEs paid relative to other Es?!)<br /><br />In terms of what to call it or brand it, I certainly find “behavioural economics” to be unwieldy, unclear and perhaps not a good signal of what it is supposed to convey. Although “Economics” would be cleaner, perhaps carry more clout with certain audiences, it would also evoke thoughts and notions of mainstream economics and certainly mis-convey what BE is about (unless BEs are successful enough to redefine what E is about.. a process that will take some time and which will continue to meet with resistance). “Common sense Economics” obviously carries a sub-text that the rest of economics is “Not Common sense Economics”. This risks alienating audiences sympathetic to economics, whilst not necessarily conveying what BE is about either. It loses points on unwieldiness too. Calling it “Behaviouralism” also has its limitations in terms of conveying the depth and breath and perhaps the underlying philosophy of this fledgling discipline, although it is, at least short. <br /><br />Perhaps before getting too stuck on the name, we need to stop to think what BE is actually about (and more importantly where it is heading), and what name it can have that accurately reflects this (although this is not strictly necessary.. there is nothing about the word “tree” that conveys treeness other than the fact that we believe this to be so through usage. Perhaps we can just coin a totally new word and use it for BE..I was actually going to suggest “humanomics” or “humanology” but googled this and, guess what? there are already disciplines with this name). <br /><br />You say behavioural economics is like "social psychology, neuropsychology and cognitive psychology applied to economic questions and the design of economic policy and institutions". But we know that the “economic question” is itself a very broad one, and spreads into domains previously considered as remits of other social sciences. So we have social psychology applied to socio economic questions. So why not just call it “social science”? It leaves the elbow room that BE needs to grow, it is respectable "science", it is understandeable and it is already familiar. <br /><br />In terms of how to exert influence, I think this has less to do with what the discipline is called, or what it contains within its fold and more to do with how many of the people who study it wind up in policy making positions. In Malta’s case, politics is vastly dominated by architects and lawyers which goes a long way to explain why much of our interventions are legal or infrastructural, with little strategic use of incentives or other policy making tools. <br /><br />MarieMariehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09074979759876759380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-79567726235401472352010-05-06T07:46:45.994+00:002010-05-06T07:46:45.994+00:00How about "human economics" instead of t...How about "human economics" instead of this "rational economics" paradigm. <br />I always thought rational expectations & the rest of it was hilarious coming from physics, where you are quite explicit about uncertainties in our model and now we are modelling systems with humans and we just assume all the problems away.<br />Thank you for a very interesting blog.<br /><br />@Gerard: And do not forget that each of the politicians and policy makers have their own agenda, whihc may or may not pull in the same direction.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38545607.post-1763160170636847052010-05-05T14:14:19.025+00:002010-05-05T14:14:19.025+00:00I think part of the 'policy resistance' to...I think part of the 'policy resistance' to behavioural economics is, dare I say, much the same as resistance to most policy innovations in the past.<br /><br />Remember 'evidence-based policy formation'? The phrase was bandied about often enough, but seriously, a review of policy development (economic and other) in Ireland over the past decade would reveal little use of 'evidence'. Decentralisation anyone?<br /><br />At the end of the day we don't have policy makers, we have politicians and public servants who advise them. The reality of policy making is that the primary motivation of the makers is to signal their continuing capacity for remaining in their job, regardless of whether they are effective or not at their job. <br /><br />Sorry if that sounds a bit cynical Liam, but if you want to seriously assess the potential for behavioural economics based policy making in Ireland then you're going to have to apply some behavioural insights to the policy makers it seems! Perhaps we need to reframe the role of behavioural economics not so much as 'evidence-based policy making' but as 'ends-based policy making'.<br /><br />But on a more positive note: businesses don't have anything like the same baggage about adopting new ways. IAPI have a forthcoming seminar with the UK's Rory Sutherland on behavioural economics and advertisiing which sold out in a matter of days.<br /><br />There's hope yet!Gerard O'Neillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12731899322768802850noreply@blogger.com