We investigate possible explanations for the rhetorical gap that divides producers and influential consumers of economic knowledge, academic economists and policymakers, respectively. We argue that economics lacks a developed theory of how academic research influences political decision making. This theoretical lacuna and the nature of the rhetorical gap have consequences for the effectiveness of academic ideas. We sketch three models, and argue for a process analysis as superior to conventional accounts. The debate on taxation of capital gains is our case study.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Volume (Year): 19 (1993) Issue (Month): 4 (Fall) Pages: 459-479 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Contact details of provider: Postal: c/o Iona College, 715 North Avenue, New Rochelle, New York 10801-1890 USA Phone: (914) 633-2088 Fax: (914) 633-2549 Email: Web page: http://www.iona.edu/eea/ More information through EDIRC
Find related papers by JEL classification: A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)