|
on History and Philosophy of Economics |
| By: | Andrei, Dalina; Andrei, Liviu Catalin |
| Abstract: | There was a time in which political authorities and decision makers were not collaborating with anybody else – here including scientific persons and bodies(authorities) – about documents that they were enacting. Such a typical aspect was easy noticed in the case of the international organization of “Latin Monetary Union” (1865-1927), of which’s written status at its time was including some exemplarily hilarious phrases. A new significant moment was the one of the international Conference hosted at Bretton-Woods in 1944 for a new international monetary system to replace the former gold standard – i.e. a tense dialogue between the hosting American administration and the famous JM Keynes, formally the UK’s representative, actually the lonely one in the audience with his own such IMS project and a legend in the area of economics. Briefly, there was a time of lack of or of not yet experience in relating the economic life and reality to the economic thinking. Economics, as a science, unlike physics or chemistry, to which the Nobel Prize is also addressed and which are natural and exact sciences, stays dominated by theories (instead of scientific postulates), so by the dialogue, despite not exactly like in democracy. In such an order, also economics stays different than the real economic life and even than the last’s specific policies applied. Just a natural mutual approaching each-other does complete this landscape since the times in which there was rather no contacts, but nothing could here be sudden or automatic. Today there is to be noticed and why not applauded the good habit in which Nobel Prizes' laureates do address to the communities about current issues in the specialty. Previously, in 1993 Paul Krugman, another Nobel Prize winner in his turn, had issued his “Lessons of Massachusetts for the EMU” and also other examples could be given. |
| Keywords: | European Union, Common currency, Monetary policy, Fiscal policy, Economic integration |
| JEL: | F15 F42 F43 F45 |
| Date: | 2025–08–17 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:126686 |
| By: | Lukas Baeuerle (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria; Socio-Ecological Transformation Lab, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria); Michelle Meixieira Groenewald (School of Economic Sciences, North West University, South Africa) |
| Abstract: | The role of academic economics education in establishing and nurturing a monoculture of thought and action, emanating from this powerful discipline has been pivotal. However, as of today, there exists a vast array of pedagogical alternatives. These are contributing to an emerging pluriculture of future economics and future economies. The following chapter presents a framework to compare these pluralizing ambitions in (and of), economics education. Furthermore, we discuss in detail how recent trends in the debate are beginning to reflect economic education in the broader context of its socio-ecological pervasiveness. So too, we grapple with the process of reshaping it from an overtly imperialist tradition towards a decolonized and diversified domain, in terms of content, capabilities and didactics. Throughout the chapter we provide examples, databases and go-to manuals that have been established to foster pluralist economic education. This chapter does not diminish the challenges that exist in economics education but also seeks to point out instances where progress has been made, and offers avenues that exist for economic pluricultures to emerge. |
| Date: | 2025–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ico:wpaper:172 |
| By: | Gardebroek, C.; Kornelis, M. |
| Abstract: | Machine Learning tools are currently transforming empirical research in agricultural economics. However, a concern with these new tools is that they are purely data-driven. The history of economic science reveals a recurring tension between the roles of economic theory and data. The objective of this paper is to describe lessons from the apparent divergence between theory-driven and data-driven modelling approaches that can guide to the current rise of machine learning modelling in agricultural economics. We first discuss different views on using theory and data in economic building in general terms. Next, we review several key econometric papers in agricultural economics in order to show how economic theory and data are used. This is followed by an evaluation of agricultural economics publications that have employed machine learning techniques. Finally, we synthesize these findings in the discussion section and provide recommendations for the effective integration of machine learning in agricultural economics. |
| Keywords: | Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies, Research Methods/Statistical Methods |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ags:aes025:356738 |
| By: | Miguel D. Ramirez (Department of Economics, Trinity College) |
| Keywords: | comparative advantage, double factorial terms of trade, finance capital, organic composition of capital, prices of production, rate of profit, real wages, surplus value, labor values, monopoly, transfer of value, and unit labor costs. |
| JEL: | B14 B17 B51 |
| Date: | 2025–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tri:wpaper:2504 |