This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Can Econometric Analysis Make (Agricultural) Economics A Hard Science? Critical Remarks And Implications For Economic Methodology

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Petrick, Martin

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper argues that mainstream economics does not follow the positivist research tradition it (often implicitly) claims to follow and expresses some serious doubt that econometrics in particular can make economics a hard science. Mathematical rigour and sophisticated statistical techniques may be regarded as persuasive analytical tools in economics, but their mere application does not guarantee good research practice. The paper outlines an alternative methodological view of pragmatic instrumentalism in which the well known tools of economic analysis can find a new place. Instead of relying on a narrow rule that purports to produce universal truth, this view encourages to increase the target area for questioning and probing. Much more attention is paid to the communicative aspects of scientific methodology – in which terms an analysis is framed, and under what conditions, to whom, by whom, and by which means it is articulated. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG MACHT DIE ÖKONOMETRIE DIE (AGRAR-) ÖKONOMIE ZU EINER HARTEN WISSENSCHAFT? Der Beitrag vertritt den Standpunkt, dass die Wirtschaftswissenschaften nicht der positivistischen Forschungstradition folgen, der sie (oft implizit) vorgeben zu folgen. Darüber hinaus wird Zweifel geäußert, dass die Ökonometrie im Besonderen in der Lage ist, die Ökonomie zu einer harten Wissenschaft zu machen. Mathematische Stringenz und anspruchsvolle statistische Verfahren mögen als überzeugende Analyseinstrumente der Ökonomie gelten, allein ihre Anwendung garantiert jedoch noch keine gute Forschungspraxis. Der Beitrag skizziert eine alternative Betrachtungsweise, die einem pragmatischen Instrumentalismus folgt und in der die bekannten Instrumente der ökonomischen Analyse einen neuen Platz finden können. Anstatt auf eine enge Regel zu vertrauen, die vorgibt, universelle Wahrheiten hervorzubringen, sollte die Zielfläche für das Hinterfragen und Nachforschen vergrößert werden. Wesentlich mehr Aufmerksamkeit wird den kommunikativen Aspekten wissenschaftlicher Arbeit gewidmet – mit Hilfe welcher Begriffe eine Analyse vorgenommen wird, und unter welchen Bedingungen, im Hinblick auf wen, durch wen und auf welche Weise sie artikuliert wird.

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.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/14911
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO) in its series IAMO Discussion Papers with number 14911.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:iamodp:14911

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 2, 06120 Halle(Saale)
Phone: (+49) (0) 345 / 29 28 0
Fax: (+49) (0) 345 / 29 28 199
Email:
Web page: http://www.iamo.de/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: economic method; econometrics; philosophy of science; pragmatic instrumentalism; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; B41; C10;

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

  1. Hanf, Claus-Henning, 1997. "Agricultural Economics in Europe: A Thriving Science for a Shrinking Sector?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press for the Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 24(3-4), pages 565-78.
  2. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Leontief, Wassily, 1971. "Theoretical Assumptions and Nonobserved Facts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 1-7, March.
  4. Mayer, Thomas, 1980. "Economics as a Hard Science: Realistic Goal or Wishful Thinking?," Economic Inquiry, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 165-78, April.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over five million full texts a year are downloaded through IDEAS.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.