Abstract
Abstract
After the financial crisis of 2008, many economists expressed dissatisfaction with the state of macroeconomics. They criticised deficiencies in the dominant dynamic stochastic general equilibrium modelling approach and conceptions of good macroeconomic research behind that dominance. This paper argues that there is a deeper problem in macroeconomics, which remains unaddressed. I connect existing literature critical of the institutions of macroeconomics and of economics in general to the institutional preconditions of effective criticism outlined by the philosopher Helen Longino. I find that as an epistemic community, macroeconomics does not function in a way that adequately supports critical evaluation of established beliefs, norms and practices. This failure may partly explain why many views on macroeconomic modelling, the tenability of which economists questioned after the crisis, were able to persist for so long. My analysis gives additional support to several recent proposals for institutional reforms in economics.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference82 articles.
1. Sins of omission and the practice of economics;Akerlof;Journal of Economic Literature,2020
2. Back to the big picture;Alexandrova;Journal of Economic Methodology,2021
3. Geographic diversity in economic publishing;Angus;Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,2021
4. Diversity in the economics profession: a new attack on an old problem;Bayer;Journal of Economic Perspectives,2016
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献