US
39 MIN READ TIME

THE PERILS OF QUANTIFICATION

ECONOMICS STANDS DEEPLY COMMITTED to quantification, especially in its most policy-facing branches. Indeed, a particular approach to quantification for policy analysis is what many applied economists mean by economics. This dogma of quantification creates perils for policy that are, in my view, as significant as the market fundamentalism the EfIP authors highlight. As economists rethink the relationship between their discipline and public policy, they would be well served grappling with these issues.

In a textbook vision of policy analysis, quantification is simply a tool; it measures and scores policy alternatives rather than shaping the alternatives themselves. We are invited to think of quantification as in service of policy aims that are defined elsewhere and by others. But this view, while popular, is misleading. We cannot divide the world into a neat dualism of aims and tools. How and what we quantify shapes and determines the aims of public policy, just as those aims shape and determine what we quantify.

Read the complete article and many more in this issue of Boston Review
Purchase options below
If you own the issue, Login to read the full article now.
Single Digital Issue Economics After Neoliberalism (Summer 2019)
 
$11.99 / issue
This issue and other back issues are not included in a new subscription. Subscriptions include the latest regular issue and new issues released during your subscription. Boston Review

This article is from...


View Issues
Boston Review
Economics After Neoliberalism (Summer 2019)
VIEW IN STORE

Other Articles in this Issue


Boston Review
ECONOMICS AFTER NEOLIBERAL ISM
This publication was made possible by a generous grant from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
EDITOR’S NOTE
NEAR THE END of Capitalism and Freedom (1962), Milton
FORUM
ECONOMICS AFTER NEOLIBERAL ISM
We live in an age of astonishing inequality. Income
FORUM RESPONSES
ECONOMICS IS THE MATERIALITY OF MORAL CHOICE
FOR NON-ECONOMISTS on the left, “Economics After Neoliberalism”
ECONOMICS AFTER PARTISANSHIP
A DEFINING FEATURE of Naidu, Rodrik, and Zucman’s essay
IN DEFENSE OF NEOLIBERALISM
SINCE COMPLAINTS about the domination of market fundamentalism
MARKETS ARE POLITICAL
LIKE NAIDU, RODRIK, AND ZUCMAN, I celebrate the advantages
WHAT ABOUT DEVELOPING COUNTRIES?
AFTER NEARLY FOUR YEARS of working as chief economic
TRADE RESTRICTIONS WILL NOT ACHIEVE ETHICAL GLOBALIZATION
I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS on Dani Rodrik’s scheme to combat
INCLUSIVE PROSPERITY FOR GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINS
STRONG, INDEPENDENT LABOR MOVEMENTS have always been
A TRANSDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
(Eric Beinhocker, W. Brian Arthur, Robert Axtell, Jenna Bednar, Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, David Colander, Molly Crockett, J. Doyne Farmer, Ricardo Hausmann, Cars Hommes, Alan Kirman, Scott Page, and David Sloan Wilson)
“ILLIBERAL” ECONOMICS
“ECONOMICS AFTER NEOLIBERALISM” describes an economics
EMPIRICISM’S IMPLICIT BIAS
NAIDU, RODRIK, AND ZUCMAN are on the cutting edge of
ECONOMISTS SHOULD ENABLE DEMOCRATIC PRIORITIES
THE RESPONSES IN THIS FORUM are too insightful to engage
ESSAYS
SELLING KEYNESIANISM
“LET’S BRING OUR EDITORIAL MICROSCOPE into focus on
EVERYDAY ECONOMISTS
HOW DO WE TALK about economics? Robert Manduca’s essay
WHO OWNS CORPORATIONS?
IN 1962 MILTON FRIEDMAN- the economist who, more than
THE FALSE PROMISE OF ENLIGHTENMENT
WE NEED METAPHORS to make sense of reality. But we
FREE SPEECH, INCORPORATED
THE FIRST AMENDMENT has long been celebrated as the
CONTRIBUTORS
Samuel Bowles is Arthur Spiegel Research Professor