|
on History and Philosophy of Economics |
| By: | Costanza Naguib |
| Abstract: | In 2011, the American Economic Association (AEA) changed its peer review policy for all their journals, shifting from a double-blind process to a single-blind peer-review process. Under this new system, referees became aware of the authors’ identities. In this paper, I explore whether this policy change influenced the prevalence of p-hacking in published papers at The American Economic Review. |
| Keywords: | p-hacking, single-blind review, double-blind review, difference-in-difference |
| JEL: | A11 A14 C13 |
| Date: | 2025–04 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ube:dpvwib:dp2504 |
| By: | Olivier Koumba (GRANEM - Groupe de Recherche Angevin en Economie et Management - UA - Université d'Angers - Institut Agro Rennes Angers - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement) |
| Abstract: | Economics concept expressed by Xenophon, "Management of the family" is too general, and its extension is therefore much broader. According to Aristotle's general rule of the comprehension and extension of the concept: less characters the concept contains, the wider the field in which it is applied. That is why, after Xenophon, all modern economists have each given their extension of economics term. There was therefore no unanimity on the object of study. However, there is no science without an object. This article, through the identification of the object, attempt to unify the definitions of economics concept that seemed to oppose. |
| Keywords: | Xenophon and modern economists, Definition of economics |
| Date: | 2025–05–24 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05142848 |
| By: | Khadija Elkam (ENCG - National School of Business and Management, Hassan 1ST University) |
| Abstract: | The methodological approach adopted by researchers in management sciences is fundamental in shaping the knowledge generated. The pragmatic stance has gained prominence as an epistemological orientation that transcends traditional philosophical dichotomies by integrating diverse research methods to address complex organizational phenomena. This paper explores the epistemological and methodological foundations of the pragmatic paradigm in management sciences. By examining its theoretical underpinnings, methodological flexibility, and implications for research design, we highlight how pragmatism enables researchers to bridge theory and practice effectively. The approach adopted is qualitative, relying on secondary data sources and critical literature synthesis to construct a conceptual and reflective analysis.Our analysis underscores the significance of methodological pluralism, practical relevance and reflexivity in adopting a pragmatic research posture in management science research. |
| Keywords: | Pragmatism, Epistemology, Management sciences, Mixed methods, Research methodology, Reflexivity |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05105883 |
| By: | MULLER, Aléaume |
| Abstract: | The so-called Cobb–Douglas production function offers a synthetic mathematical formalization of economic activity. Focused primarily on capital and labor, it systematically overlooks the role of natural resources and the environment—an omission that has made it the target of recurring criticism. To examine the validity of these critiques, this article proposes a parallel with Kleiber’s law in biology, which links an organism’s energy consumption to its body mass through the notion of basal metabolic rate. We demonstrate that this analogy opens the way for a reinterpretation of both the Cobb–Douglas function and the Solow model, enabling a perspective that is not only compatible with but also complementary to ecological economics. Moreover, it reveals a deeper homology: in both cases, the functions describe the behavior of dissipative thermodynamic systems, which organize energy flows to sustain their structural integrity. This framework allows for a physical reading of economic production mechanisms—not as abstract aggregates, but as expressions of a universal process of self-organization driven by flows of matter and energy. It enables the integration of thermodynamic constraints into the core of economic theory, in continuity with existing literature, while paving the way for an understanding of the economy as a physically evolving system |
| Date: | 2025–06–21 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:q8evd_v1 |
| By: | Christophe Darmangeat (LADYSS - Laboratoire Dynamiques Sociales et Recomposition des Espaces - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - UP8 - Université Paris 8 Vincennes-Saint-Denis - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - UPD7 - Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, TRACES - Travaux et recherches archéologiques sur les cultures, les espaces et les sociétés - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - UT2J - Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès - UT - Université de Toulouse - MCC - Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication - Inrap - Institut national de recherches archéologiques préventives - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) |
| Abstract: | The division of labour is a major dimension of human society, intimately linked to advances in technology and productivity. However, the ways and mechanisms of its emergence remain the subject of much debate. After returning to some of the basic issues of definition, we will review the state of our knowledge of its oldest form, that based on gender, which has recently attracted renewed interest. After briefly mentioning the questions that remain as to the nature of the first activities concerned, we will finally criticise the standard theory, which since the eighteenth century has seen the presence of a "surplus" as a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of a specialised craft. An alternative line of reasoning will be suggested, which places the key variable not in food productivity, but in the size of social units. |
| Abstract: | la division du travail constitue une dimension majeure des sociétés humaines, intimement liée aux progrès de leur technique et de leur productivité. Les voies et les mécanismes de son émergence restent cependant l'objet de nombreuses interrogations. Après être revenu sur quelques questions essentielles de définitions, on reviendra sur l'état des connaissances en ce qui concerne sa plus ancienne forme, celle qui s'opère selon le sexe, qui a récemment suscité un intérêt renouvelé. Après avoir rapidement évoqué les interrogations qui subsistent sur la nature des premières activités à avoir été concernées, on questionnera enfin la théorie standard, qui, depuis le xviii e siècle, voit dans la présence d'un « surplus » la condition nécessaire et suffisante de l'existence d'un artisanat spécialisé. On suggèrera un raisonnement alternatif, qui situe la variable-clé non dans la productivité alimentaire, mais dans la taille des unités sociales. |
| Keywords: | Division of labour, Surplus, Specialisation, expertise, Craftsmanship, Division du travail, spécialisation, artisanat, division du travail |
| Date: | 2023–10–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04857081 |
| By: | Laure Bereni (CMH - Centre Maurice Halbwachs - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Département de Sciences sociales ENS-PSL - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres) |
| Abstract: | This essay offers a progressive critique of the business case for diversity, which has been the hegemonic justification for workplace diversity programs over the past 40 years. First, the article shows that, since its emergence in the 1980s, this approach has gained only fragile recognition in the corporate world. Second, it highlights three main conceptual inconsistencies of the business case for diversity: 1) it cannot be falsified, since the generic notion of diversity is so inherently polysemic and ambiguous; 2) even when the scope of diversity is more clearly delineated, the relationship between diversity and performance is inevitably circumscribed and contingent; 3) in practice, it is most often the appearance of diversity, equity, and inclusion that is tacitly acknowledged as a source of economic benefits in the corporate world. The article concludes by pointing to the political perils associated with the hegemonic position of the business rationale, not only for diversity initiatives but also for other "responsible" corporate programs such as sustainability and human rights. |
| Abstract: | Cet essai propose une critique progressiste de l'argumentaire économique en faveur de la diversité, qui a été la justification hégémonique des programmes de diversité en entreprise au cours des 40 dernières années. Tout d'abord, l'article montre que, depuis son apparition dans les années 1980, cette approche n'a obtenu qu'une reconnaissance fragile dans le monde de l'entreprise. Ensuite, il met en évidence trois incohérences conceptuelles principales de l'argumentaire économique en faveur de la diversité : 1) il ne peut être réfuté, car la notion générique de diversité est intrinsèquement polysémique et ambiguë ; 2) même lorsque la portée de la diversité est plus clairement délimitée, la relation entre diversité et performance est inévitablement circonscrite et contingente ; 3) dans la pratique, c'est le plus souvent l'apparence de diversité, d'équité et d'inclusion qui est tacitement reconnue comme source d'avantages économiques dans le monde de l'entreprise. |
| Keywords: | Diversity, Inclusion, Business case |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-05067811 |