首页> 外文OA文献 >Whither economic complexity? A new heterodox economic paradigm or just another variation within the mainstream?
【2h】

Whither economic complexity? A new heterodox economic paradigm or just another variation within the mainstream?

机译:哪个经济复杂?一种新的异端经济范式还是主流中的另一种变异?

摘要

[Introduction] Economics is in considerable disarray. Neoclassical orthodoxy still remains the u2018normal scienceu2019 standard procedure and provides the foundation for economic education. However, for some time now many economists have claimed that its scientific research programme as a problem-solving tool has been squeezed out and is no longer at the cutting-edge of research (see e.g. Colander/Holt/Rosser 2004, Holt/Rosser/Colander 2011, Arthur 2013). After the recent global financial crisis, the time seemed right for a scientific overhaul of the whole discipline of economics under the heading of u2018new economic thinkingu2018, an idea promoted as much by economists unhappy with the state of the discipline as by economics students unwilling to learn something apparently irrelevant for the real world and by economic and business practitioners and patrons who sponsored research that, in the past, few were willing to support financially. It seems obvious that heterodox economics u2013 the part of the scientific community which had been critical of the state of the discipline long before the outbreak of the global financial crisis and which long before had demanded a u2018new economic thinkingu2018 - could have been seen as a natural candidate for a scientific research programme or paradigm that could assume the spotlight. However, heterodox economics is a blurred description of a scientific paradigm comprising quite different thought collectives and is based on very shaky analytical grounds (see e.g. Mearman 2012). In this contribution, we will take a closer look at a scientific research programme which has often been cited as the one whose time is about to come: complexity economics (see e.g. Buchanan 2004, Colander 2003, Beinhocker 2006, Davis 2008; Roos 2015). Before we attempt to describe the paradigmatic foundations of complexity economics and arrange them in the context of the orthodox/heterodox divide, we need to explain our understanding of the concept of a paradigm and clarify what makes a paradigm orthodox or heterodox and why it is important to classify a paradigm as either orthodox or heterodox. The paper will conclude with a statement about the paradigmatical position of complexity economics and its significance for the future of the economic discipline.
机译:[简介]经济学处于混乱状态。新古典正统思想仍然保留着正常科学的标准程序,并为经济教育提供了基础。但是,一段时间以来,许多经济学家声称其作为解决问题工具的科学研究计划已经被挤出,不再处于研究的前沿(例如,参见Colander / Holt / Rosser 2004,Holt / Rosser / Colander 2011,Arthur 2013)。在最近的全球金融危机之后,似乎是时候对科学的整个经济学学科进行全面改革,现在的时机为“新经济思想”,经济学家对经济学学科的现状感到不满,而经济学家则提倡这一思想。不愿意学习与现实世界,经济和商业从业人员以及赞助研究的赞助商无关的东西,这些研究过去很少有人愿意提供财政支持。似乎很明显,异质经济学是科学界的一部分,它早在全球金融危机爆发之前就对学科的状态提出了批评,并且很久以前就要求进行新的经济思考。被视为可以引起人们关注的科学研究计划或范例的自然候选人。但是,异质经济学是对科学范式的模糊描述,它包含了截然不同的思想集合,并且基于非常不稳定的分析基础(参见例如Mearman 2012)。在这一贡献中,我们将仔细研究一个科学研究计划,该计划通常被认为是即将到来的时代:复杂性经济学(参见例如Buchanan 2004,Colander 2003,Beinhocker 2006,Davis 2008; Roos 2015) 。在我们尝试描述复杂性经济学的范式基础并将其安排在正统/异教徒鸿沟的背景下之前,我们需要先解释一下对范式概念的理解,并弄清是什么使范式正统或异常性构成,以及为什么它很重要将范式分类为正统或异常。本文最后将对复杂性经济学的范式地位及其对经济学科未来的意义进行说明。

著录项

  • 作者

    Heise Arne;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2016
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号