IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/110996.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Three ways in which pandemic models may perform a pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • van Basshuysen, Philippe
  • White, Lucie
  • Khosrowi, Donal
  • Frisch, Mathias

Abstract

Models not only represent but may also influence their targets in important ways. While models’ abilities to influence outcomes has been studied in the context of economic models, often under the label ‘performativity’, we argue that this phenomenon also pertains to epidemiological models, such as those used for forecasting the trajectory of the Covid-19 pandemic. After identifying three ways in which a model by the Covid-19 Response Team at Imperial College London (Ferguson et al. 2020) may have influenced scientific advice, policy, and individual responses, we consider the implications of epidemiological models’ performative capacities. We argue, first, that performativity may impair models’ ability to successfully predict the course of an epidemic; but second, that it may provide an additional sense in which these models can be successful, namely by changing the course of an epidemic.

Suggested Citation

  • van Basshuysen, Philippe & White, Lucie & Khosrowi, Donal & Frisch, Mathias, 2021. "Three ways in which pandemic models may perform a pandemic," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110996, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:110996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/110996/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald Mackenzie & Fabian Muniesa & Lucia Siu, 2007. "Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics," Post-Print halshs-00149145, HAL.
    2. Ivan Boldyrev & Ekaterina Svetlova (ed.), 2016. "Enacting Dismal Science," Perspectives from Social Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-48876-3, December.
    3. Henshel, Richard L., 1993. "Do self-fulfilling prophecies improve or degrade predictive accuracy? How sociology and economics can disagree and both be right," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 85-104.
    4. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Sears, James & Villas-Boas, Miguel & Villas-Boas, Vasco, 2020. "Are We #StayingHome to Flatten the Curve?," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt5h97n884, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    5. Andrew I. Friedson & Drew McNichols & Joseph J. Sabia & Dhaval Dave, 2020. "Did California’s Shelter-in-Place Order Work? Early Coronavirus-Related Public Health Effects," NBER Working Papers 26992, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Donald MacKenzie, 2006. "An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262134608, December.
    7. Ivan Boldyrev & Alexey Ushakov, 2016. "Adjusting the model to adjust the world: constructive mechanisms in postwar general equilibrium theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 38-56, March.
    8. Donald MacKenzie & Fabian Muniesa & Lucia Siu, 2007. "Introduction to Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics," Introductory Chapters, in: Donald MacKenzie & Fabian Muniesa & Lucia Siu (ed.),Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics, Princeton University Press.
    9. Christopher Avery & William Bossert & Adam Clark & Glenn Ellison & Sara Fisher Ellison, 2020. "An Economist's Guide to Epidemiology Models of Infectious Disease," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(4), pages 79-104, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Aligica, Paul Dragos, 2013. "Institutional Diversity and Political Economy: The Ostroms and Beyond," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199843909.
    2. Loconto, Allison & Rajão, Raoni, 2020. "Governing by models: Exploring the technopolitics of the (in)visilibities of land," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Miguel Poiares Maduro & Giulio Pasi & Gianluca Misuraca, 2018. "Social Impact Investment in the EU. Financing strategies and outcome oriented approaches for social policy innovation: narratives, experiences, and recommendations," JRC Research Reports JRC111373, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Shaozeng Zhang, 2017. "From externality in economics to leakage in carbon markets: An anthropological approach to market making," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 132-143, January.
    5. Sarah Bracking, 2012. "How do Investors Value Environmental Harm/Care? Private Equity Funds, Development Finance Institutions and the Partial Financialization of Nature-based Industries," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 271-293, January.
    6. Teppo Felin & Nicolai J. Foss, 2009. "Performativity of Theory, Arbitrary Conventions, and Possible Worlds: A Reality Check," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 676-678, May.
    7. Teppo Felin & Nicolai J. Foss, 2009. "Social Reality, the Boundaries of Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, and Economics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 654-668, June.
    8. Andriani, Pierpaolo & Herrmann-Pillath, Carsten, 2011. "Performing comparative advantage: The case of the global coffee business," Frankfurt School - Working Paper Series 167, Frankfurt School of Finance and Management.
    9. Roberts, John & Jones, Megan, 2009. "Accounting for self interest in the credit crisis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 856-867, August.
    10. Christian Walter, 2020. "Sustainable Financial Risk Modelling Fitting the SDGs: Some Reflections," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-28, September.
    11. Aaron Z. Pitluck & Fabio Mattioli & Daniel Souleles, 2018. "Finance beyond function: Three causal explanations for financialization," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 157-171, June.
    12. William Davies, 2013. "Book Review," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 110-112, February.
    13. Power, Michael, 2021. "Modelling the microfoundations of the audit society: organizations and the logic of the audit trail," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100243, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Fabrizio Ferraro & Jeffrey Pfeffer & Robert I. Sutton, 2009. "How and Why Theories Matter: A Comment on Felin and Foss (2009)," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 669-675, June.
    15. Pucci, Richard & Skærbæk, Peter, 2020. "The co-performation of financial economics in accounting standard-setting: A study of the translation of the expected credit loss model in IFRS 9," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Chris Clarke, 2012. "Financial Engineering, Not Economic Photography," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 261-278, January.
    17. Francesco GUALA, 2015. "Performativity Rationalized," Departmental Working Papers 2015-07, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    18. Cochrane, David Troy, 2020. "Disobedient Things: The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Accounting for Disaster," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(1), pages 3-32.
    19. Lilian Muchimba & Alexis Stenfors, 2021. "Beyond LIBOR: Money Markets and the Illusion of Representativeness," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(2), pages 565-573, April.
    20. Leon Wansleben, 2013. "Dreaming with BRICs," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 453-471, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Covid-19; epidemiological models; performativity; prediction; success; model evaluation; coronavirus;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:110996. 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.