The Unassuming Economist

From Dani Rodrik’s weblog:

Ten commandments for economists

1. Economics is a collection of models; cherish their diversity.

2. It’s a model, not the model.

3. Make your model simple enough to isolate specific causes and how they work, but not so simple that it leaves out key interactions among causes.

4. Unrealistic assumptions are OK; unrealistic critical assumptions are not OK.

5. The world is (almost) always second-best.

6. To map a model to the real world you need explicit empirical diagnostics, which is more craft than science.

7. Do not confuse agreement among economists for certainty about how the world works.

8. It’s OK to say “I don’t know” when asked about the economy or policy.

9. Efficiency is not everything.

10. Substituting your values for the public’s is an abuse of your expertise.

Ten commandments for non-economists

1. Economics is a collection of models with no predetermined conclusions; reject any arguments otherwise.

2. Do not criticize an economist’s model because of its assumptions; ask how the results would change if certain problematic assumptions were more realistic.

3. Analysis requires simplicity; beware of incoherence that passes itself off as complexity.

4. Do not let math scare you; economists use math not because they are smart, but because they are not smart enough.

5. When an economist makes a recommendation, ask what makes him/her sure the underlying model applies to the case at hand.

6. When an economist uses the term “economic welfare,” ask what s/he means by it.

7. Beware that an economist may speak differently in public than in the seminar room.

8. Economists don’t (all) worship markets, but they know better how they work than you do.

9. If you think all economists think alike, attend one of their seminars.

10. If you think economists are especially rude to non-economists, attend one of their seminars.

From VoxEU: “The Eurozone crisis has opened fault lines between German economists and policymakers and those in a number of Eurozone (in particular periphery) countries.This column introduces a new eBook explaining the historical development of the ordoliberal school of economics and its influence on German policymaking, and contrasting it critically with what we like to call the Anglo-Saxon-Latin pragmatism of economic policymaking.”

Download the new eBook here.

Dani Rodrik says:

“That neoliberalism is a slippery, shifting concept, with no explicit lobby of defenders, does not mean that it is irrelevant or unreal. Who can deny that the world has experienced a decisive shift toward markets from the 1980s on? Or that center-left politicians—Democrats in the United States, Socialists and Social Democrats in Europe—enthusiastically adopted some of the central creeds of Thatcherism and Reaganism, such as deregulation, privatization, financial liberalization, and individual enterprise? Much of our contemporary policy discussion remains infused with norms and principles supposedly grounded in homo economicus.

But the looseness of the term neoliberalism also means that criticism of it often misses the mark. There is nothing wrong with markets, private entrepreneurship, or incentives—when deployed appropriately. Their creative use lies behind the most significant economic achievements of our time. As we heap scorn on neoliberalism, we risk throwing out some of neoliberalism’s useful ideas.

The real trouble is that mainstream economics shades too easily into ideology, constraining the choices that we appear to have and providing cookie-cutter solutions. A proper understanding of the economics that lies behind neoliberalism would allow us to identify—and to reject—ideology when it masquerades as economic science. Most importantly it would help us develop the institutional imagination we badly need to redesign capitalism for the twenty-first century.”

Here’s the rest of the article.

My paper with Sangyup Choi, Davide Furceri, and Yi Huang on the effects of effect of aggregate uncertainty shocks on sectoral productivity is now forthcoming in the Journal of International Money and Finance and is available (link) at the JIMF website. First, we find that an increase in aggregate uncertainty reduces productivity growth more in industries that depend heavily on external finance. Second, the mechanism at play is that during periods of high uncertainty, firms that are credit constrained switch the composition of investment by reducing productivity-enhancing investment that is more subject to liquidity risks. Third, the mechanism is stronger during recessions, when credit constraints bind more. For those without access to JIMF, an earlier working paper (link) version is available.

An IMF working paper finds: “This paper assesses spillovers from fiscal consolidations in 10 euro area countries using an innovative empirical methodology. The analysis lends support to the existence of fiscal spillovers, with fiscal consolidation in one country reducing not only the domestic output but also the output of other member states. Spillover effects are larger for: (i) more closely located and economically integrated countries, and (ii) for fiscal shocks originating from relatively larger countries. Most of the impact comes from revenue measures, while the impact of expenditure measures is relatively weaker. The latter result is consistent with the distortionary effects of taxation and empirical literature on fiscal multipliers using the narrative approach (Leigh and others 2010; Abiad and others 2011).

Our results have important policy implications. They suggest that fiscal consolidations in individual euro area countries, especially the larger ones, can reduce aggregate demand in others. The magnitude of cross-country spillovers has strengthened with the economic integration and introduction of a single currency. Also, spillovers can be larger if fiscal consolidations are implemented in downturns. Therefore, individual euro area countries should consider fiscal measures implemented in other members as well as the state of the economy when implementing domestic policies.”

For previous IMF work on negative demand spillovers in the euro area, see my VoxEU blog and Larry Elliott’s column.

Figure 1. Impact on Eurozone output from wage moderation, quantitative easing and structural