How many economists does it take to screw up the economy?

Barry Eichengreen has an excellent piece on how the economics profession went astray in the years before the Great Meltdown (hat tip: Matt Yglesias). I’m not an economist, but it’s more nuanced and convincing than some of the other jeremiads I’ve read on this subject. Money quote: The late twentieth century was the heyday of ...

Walt-Steve-foreign-policy-columnist20
Walt-Steve-foreign-policy-columnist20
Stephen M. Walt
By , a columnist at Foreign Policy and the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University.

Barry Eichengreen has an excellent piece on how the economics profession went astray in the years before the Great Meltdown (hat tip: Matt Yglesias). I'm not an economist, but it's more nuanced and convincing than some of the other jeremiads I've read on this subject. Money quote:

Barry Eichengreen has an excellent piece on how the economics profession went astray in the years before the Great Meltdown (hat tip: Matt Yglesias). I’m not an economist, but it’s more nuanced and convincing than some of the other jeremiads I’ve read on this subject. Money quote:

The late twentieth century was the heyday of deductive economics. Talented and facile theorists set the intellectual agenda. Their very facility enabled them to build models with virtually any implication, which meant that policy makers could pick and choose at their convenience. Theory turned out to be too malleable, in other words, to provide reliable guidance for policy.

In contrast, the twenty-first century will be the age of inductive economics, when empiricists hold sway and advice is grounded in concrete observation of markets and their inhabitants. Work in economics, including the abstract model building in which theorists engage, will be guided more powerfully by this real-world observation. It is about time."

Of course, I like this line of argument because I once wrote something similar about the imperial tendencies of rational choice theorists in the field of security studies. The point is not to eschew all formal approaches or become atheoretical, however; the point is to maintain a healthy balance between deductive theorizing (whether done with formal tools or not) and various forms of empirical testing (experimental, quantitative and qualitative/historical).  

Stephen M. Walt is a columnist at Foreign Policy and the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University. Twitter: @stephenwalt

More from Foreign Policy

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping give a toast during a reception following their talks at the Kremlin in Moscow on March 21.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping give a toast during a reception following their talks at the Kremlin in Moscow on March 21.

Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?

The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.

Xi and Putin shake hands while carrying red folders.
Xi and Putin shake hands while carrying red folders.

Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World

It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.

Russian President Vladimir Putin greets Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.
Russian President Vladimir Putin greets Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

It’s a New Great Game. Again.

Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.

Kurdish military officers take part in a graduation ceremony in Erbil, the capital of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, on Jan. 15.
Kurdish military officers take part in a graduation ceremony in Erbil, the capital of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, on Jan. 15.

Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing

The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.