IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/108622.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How-possibly explanations in economics: anything goes?

Author

Listed:
  • Grüne-Yanoff, Till
  • Verreault-Julien, Philippe

Abstract

The recent literature on economic models has rejected the traditional requirement that their epistemic value necessary depended on them offering actual explanations of phenomena. Contributors to that literature have argued that many models do not aim at providing how-actually explanations, but instead how-possibly explanations. However, how to assess the epistemic value of HPEs remains an open question. We present a programmatic approach to answering it. We first introduce a conceptual framework that distinguishes how-actually explanations from how-possibly explanations and that further differentiates between epistemic and objective how-possibly explanations. Secondly, we show how that framework can be used for methodological appraisal as well as for understanding methodological controversies.

Suggested Citation

  • Grüne-Yanoff, Till & Verreault-Julien, Philippe, 2021. "How-possibly explanations in economics: anything goes?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108622, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:108622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/108622/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    2. Donald A. Walker, 1997. "Advances in General Equilibrium Theory," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1216.
    3. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    4. Blaug, Mark, 2003. "The Formalist Revolution of the 1950s," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 145-156, June.
    5. Uskali Mäki & Caterina Marchionni, 2011. "Is geographical economics imperializing economic geography?," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(4), pages 645-665, July.
    6. Petri Ylikoski & N. Emrah Aydinonat, 2014. "Understanding with theoretical models," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 19-36, March.
    7. Philippe Verreault-Julien, 2017. "Non-causal understanding with economic models: the case of general equilibrium," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 297-317, July.
    8. Kincaid, Harold & Ross, Don (ed.), 2009. "The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195189254.
    9. Caterina Marchionni, 2006. "Contrastive explanation and unrealistic models: The case of the new economic geography," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 425-446.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Schulz & Daniel M. Mayerhoffer, 2021. "Equal chances, unequal outcomes? Network-based evolutionary learning and the industrial dynamics of superstar firms," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1357-1385, November.
    2. Schulz, Jan & Mayerhoffer, Daniel M., 2021. "A network approach to consumption," BERG Working Paper Series 173, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    3. Kai Fischbach & Johannes Marx & Tim Weitzel, 2021. "Agent-based modeling in social sciences," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1263-1270, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miguel Atienza & Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo & Nicholas Phelps, 2019. "Bridges over troubled water? Journals, geographers and economists in the field of economy and space 1980–2017," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(8), pages 1800-1823, November.
    2. Baldwin, Richard, 1993. "A Domino Theory of Regionalism," CEPR Discussion Papers 857, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Bogang Jun & Aamena Alshamsi & Jian Gao & Cesar A Hidalgo, 2017. "Relatedness, Knowledge Diffusion, and the Evolution of Bilateral Trade," Papers 1709.05392, arXiv.org.
    4. Dariusz Kotlewski, 2022. "Przesłanki za wykorzystaniem rachunkowości wzrostu gospodarczego w badaniu specjalizacji regionalnych," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 2, pages 235-258.
    5. Jaya Prakash Pradhan & Mohammad Zohair, 2015. "Subnational Export Performance and Determinants," Review of Market Integration, India Development Foundation, vol. 7(2), pages 133-174, August.
    6. Fujita, Masahisa & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2009. "New Economic Geography: An appraisal on the occasion of Paul Krugman's 2008 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 109-119, March.
    7. J.Peter Neary, 2001. "Of Hype and Hyperbolas: Introducing the New Economic Geography," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 536-561, June.
    8. B. Fingleton & P. Cheshire & H. Garretsen & D. Igliori & J. Gallo & P. McCann & J. McCombie & V. Monastiriotis & B. Moore & M. Roberts, 2009. "Editorial," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1-4.
    9. Gali, Jordi, 1995. "Expectations-driven spatial fluctuations," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-19, February.
    10. Pedro Antonio Martín Cervantes & Nuria Rueda López & Salvador Cruz Rambaud, 2020. "The Effect of Globalization on Economic Development Indicators: An Inter-Regional Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-18, March.
    11. Magdalena Olczyk, 2016. "International Competitiveness in the Economics Literature: A Bibliometric Study," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 2(4), pages 375-388, October.
    12. Haaparanta, Pertti, 1998. "Regional concentration, trade, and welfare," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 445-463, July.
    13. Asaftei, Gabriel & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2010. "Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 340-356, September.
    14. Heiland, Inga & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2022. "Heterogeneous workers, trade, and migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Joze P. Damijan & Crt Kostevc, 2002. "The Impact of European Integration on Adjustment Pattern of Regional Wages in Transition Countries: Testing Competitive Economic Geography Models," LICOS Discussion Papers 11802, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    16. Kerstin Enflo & Joan Ramón Rosés, 2015. "Coping with regional inequality in Sweden: structural change, migrations, and policy, 1860–2000," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 68(1), pages 191-217, February.
    17. Theodore Tsekeris & Klimis Vogiatzoglou, 2014. "Public infrastructure investments and regional specialization: empirical evidence from Greece," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 265-289, August.
    18. Behrens, Kristian & Mion, Giordano & Murata, Yasusada & Suedekum, Jens, 2017. "Spatial frictions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 40-70.
    19. James R. Markusen & Anthony J. Venables, 2021. "The theory of endowment, intra-industry and multi-national trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 4, pages 69-94, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Kim, Ho Yeon, 2012. "Shrinking population and the urban hierarchy," IDE Discussion Papers 360, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    epistemic; explanation; how-possibly; modal; models; possibility; 2018- 0135;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:108622. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.