nep-hpe New Economics Papers
on History and Philosophy of Economics
Issue of 2023‒02‒13
seven papers chosen by
Erik Thomson
University of Manitoba

  1. Policy relevant, multidisciplinary, disruptive: What kind of research do economists want? By Peter Andre; Armin Falk
  2. Енергетичната и екологична икономическа теория на Славчо Загоров (1898 - 1970) By Nenovska, Nona; Magnin, Eric; Nenovsky, Nikolay
  3. On the Theory of the Pragmatic Public By Whetsell, Travis A
  4. Investment Planning and the Input-Output Model in Postwar Europe By Vincent Carret
  5. On the notion of measurable utility on a connected and separable topological space: an order isomorphism theorem By Gianmarco Caldini
  6. Opening Research Data: What Does It Mean for Social Sciences? By Héloïse Berkowitz; Hélène Delacour
  7. Cycles économiques : les leçons de l’histoire By Claude Diebolt

  1. By: Peter Andre (University of Bonn); Armin Falk (University of Bonn, briq)
    Abstract: Based on a global survey of almost 10, 000 academic economists, Peter Andre and Armin Falk explore what economists perceive to be worthwhile research in their discipline. Finding many economists think that economic research should become more policy relevant, multidisciplinary, and disruptive, and cover a more diverse range of research topics, they suggest that economics and economists would benefit from a more inclusive discussion of the direction in which the field is travelling.
    Date: 2021–09
  2. By: Nenovska, Nona; Magnin, Eric; Nenovsky, Nikolay
    Abstract: This article aims to rediscover an author relatively unknown to the general public, Slavcho Zagorov, and revive his ideas. Zagorov is a Bulgarian economist and statistician whose main works date from 1954 and are mainly devoted to the concept of energy flow in the economy and human metabolism, explained through the prism of thermodynamics. Criticizing the mainstream economic approach to national income in terms of "value", he developed a new approach of "national income movement". According to Zagorov, national income is "energy movement", which he calculates in terms of primary energy sources. He draws conclusions from direct observations on the economic development of the Danube countries.
    Keywords: B31, B30, N01 , Q43, Q5
    JEL: B30 B31 N01 Q40 Q43 Q50
    Date: 2022–09–15
  3. By: Whetsell, Travis A
    Abstract: The discipline of public administration has grappled with concepts regarding the public for well over a century. Scholars from public choice, public value(s), and publicness have analyzed myriad elements of administration related to the public. However, detailed explorations of this fundamental term remain relatively sparse, disparate, and under-theorized. In this essay, an ontology and intellectual history of the public is developed, starting with John Dewey’s classic work The Public and its Problems. Dewey’s social-interaction-consequence view of the public, referred to here as the pragmatic public is evaluated through multiple theories in public administration. Finally, theories of social networks and complexity science are unified with the pragmatic public, recentering and reinvigorating the theory in the context of network governance.
    Date: 2023–01–14
  4. By: Vincent Carret (TRIANGLE - Triangle : action, discours, pensée politique et économique - ENS Lyon - École normale supérieure - Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - IEP Lyon - Sciences Po Lyon - Institut d'études politiques de Lyon - Université de Lyon - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Duke University [Durham])
    Abstract: As economic planners sought to rebuild Europe in the unstable postwar period, economic expertise was called upon to help in the drawing of national budgets and to inform economic and planning policies. A tool that circulated from academia to economic administrations was the input-output framework that had been developed by Wassily Leontief since the 1930s. As Leontief came into contact with other economists and with the goals of economic administrations, his framework was repurposed to give answers to the questions of economic planners. Statisticians and economists in Western Europe worked to integrate the input-output framework with the developing national accounts. Looking at their work with a particular focus on investment and development policies, I bring new insights on the role of experts, by showing that the input-output model had little impact on the actual coordination of economic policies.
    Keywords: Leontief, input-output, planning, investment, Europe, instability
    Date: 2022–12–12
  5. By: Gianmarco Caldini
    Abstract: The aim of this article is to define a notion of cardinal utility function called measurable utility and to define it on a connected and separable subset of a weakly ordered topological space. The definition is equivalent to the ones given by Frisch in 1926 and by Shapley in 1975 and postulates axioms on a set of alternatives that allow both to ordinally rank alternatives and to compare their utility differences. After a brief review of the philosophy of utilitarianism and the history of utility theory, the paper introduces the mathematical framework to represent intensity comparisons of utility and proves a list of topological lemmas that will be used in the main result. Finally, the article states and proves a representation theorem for a measurable utility function defined on a connected and separable subset of a weakly ordered topological space equipped with another weak order on its cartesian product. Under some assumptions on the order relations, the main theorem proves existence and uniqueness, up to positive affine transformations, of an order isomorphism with the real line.
    Date: 2022–12
  6. By: Héloïse Berkowitz (LEST - Laboratoire d'économie et de sociologie du travail - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, AMU - Aix Marseille Université); Hélène Delacour (UL - Université de Lorraine)
    Abstract: Recent international trends demonstrate multilevel efforts to ‘open' science across its whole ecosystem and lifecycle – from capturing research data through to publishing results. In social sciences, the publication process is already largely ‘open access' or transitioning toward it. However, opening research data raises specific issues and concerns for the field. Here, we set out to understand what open research data mean for social sciences, and if, why, and how data should be made open. We argue that while the ecosystem of actors, infrastructures, standards, and principles is starting to take structure in France and abroad, there are several barriers to the process of opening data in social sciences: (1) a misperception of the motivations for opening data (i.e., focusing on risks of exercising control over researchers and their academic freedom and overlooking motivations like data patrimonialization, pooling and potential synergies, trust-building, and broader engagement), (2) a system based on competition and the dominant process of ‘starification' in research, (3) a lack of resources and capabilities that might further exacerbate inequalities among genders, communities, institutions, and countries, and (4) the potential risks inherent to opening data and the specific constraints posed by social science data. Against this backdrop, we investigate several ways forward to operationalize not only FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) but also CARE (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, Ethics) principles for open data in social sciences, before going on to present M@n@gement's new open data policy.
    Abstract: Les tendances internationales œuvrent pour l'ouverture de la science sur l'ensemble de son cycle de vie, c'est-à-dire depuis les données de la recherche jusqu'à la publication des résultats. En sciences sociales, si le processus de publication est déjà largement ouvert ou en voie de l'être, la situation est différente concernant l'ouverture des données de la recherche qui soulève de nombreuses questions. Afin de participer à ce débat, nous cherchons, danscet article, à expliquer ce que signifie l'ouverture des données de la recherche en sciences sociales, à comprendre ses motivations ainsi que les conditions de son opérationnalisation. En effet, alors que l'écosystème d'acteurs, d'infrastructures, de standards et de principes directeurs (FAIR et CARE) se structurent en France et à l'étranger, plusieurs éléments entravent actuellement le processus d'ouverture des données en sciences sociales : 1) une perception erronée des motivations pour l'ouverture des données, que sont la patrimonialisation, la mise en commun des données et les synergies potentielles, l'instauration d'un climat de confiance, un engagement plus large, plutôt que le simple exercice d'un contrôle sur la liberté académique et les équipes de recherche, 2) un système de concurrence et de starification de la recherche, 3) un manque de ressources qui pourrait davantage aggraver les inégalités entre les sexes, les communautés, les institutions et les pays, et 4) des risques potentiels liés à l'ouverture des données et les contraintes spécifiques des sciences sociales. Dans ce contexte, nous proposons des solutions pour rendre opérationnels l'ouverture des données en sciences sociales, au-delà du simple respect des principes FAIR et CARE, avant de présenter la nouvelle politique d'ouverture des données de la recherche de M@n@gement.
    Keywords: Open research data, Open science, FAIR principles, CARE principles, Social sciences
    Date: 2022–12–15
  7. By: Claude Diebolt (BETA/CNRS & University of Strasbourg)
    Date: 2023

This nep-hpe issue is ©2023 by Erik Thomson. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.