Why is Economics not a Complex Systems Science?
AbstractEconomics is viewed as a discipline that is mainly concerned with 'simplistic' theorizing, centered upon constrained optimization. As such, it is ahistorical and outcome focused, ie, it does not deal with economic processes. It is argued that all parts of the economy are inhabited by complex adaptive systems operating in complicated historical contexts and that this should be acknowledged at the core of economic analysis. It is explained how economics changes in fundamental ways when such a perspective is adopted, even if the presumption that people will try to optimize subject to constraints is retained. This is illustrated through discussion of how the production function construct has been used to provide an abstract representation of the network structures that exist in complex adaptive systems such as firms. It is argued that this has led to a serious understatement of the importance of rule systems that govern the connections in productive networks. The macroeconomics of John Maynard Keynes is then revisited to provide an example of how some economists in earlier times were able to provide powerful economic analysis that was based on intuitions that we can now classify as belonging to complex systems perspective on the economy. Throughout the paper, the reasons why a complex systems perspective did not develop in the mainstream of economics in the 20th Century, despite the massive popularity of an economist like Keynes, are discussed and this is returned to in the concluding section where the prospect of paradigmatic change occurring in the future is evaluated.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia in its series Discussion Papers Series with number 336.
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-02-13 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2005-02-13 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-HPE-2005-02-13 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-NET-2005-02-13 (Network Economics)
- NEP-PKE-2005-02-13 (Post Keynesian Economics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Brendan Markey-Towler & John Foster, 2013. "Why economic theory has little to say about the causes and effects of inequality," Discussion Papers Series 476, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
- James Derbyshire & Garry Haywood, 2007. "Schumpeterian 'Creative Destruction' and Strengthening the Business Stock Through Firm Formation," Research Papers 200739, University of Liverpool Management School.
- Alberto Russo, 2009. "On the evolution of the Italian bank branch distribution," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(3), pages 2063-2078.
- Moreira, Paulo, 2013. "The Maritime Chain as a Complex Adaptive System," MPRA Paper 50895, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Carl Chiarella & Corrado Di Guilmi, 2011. "Limit Distribution of Evolving Strategies in Financial Markets," Research Paper Series 294, Quantitative Finance Research Centre, University of Technology, Sydney.
- He, Zheng & Rayman-Bacchus, Lez & Wu, Yiming, 2011. "Self-organization of industrial clustering in a transition economy: A proposed framework and case study evidence from China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1280-1294.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Randal Anderson).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.