IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cuswps/oek51.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Divided we stand? Professional consensus and political conflict in academic economics

Author

Listed:
  • Beyer, Karl M.
  • Pühringer, Stephan

Abstract

In this paper we address the issue of the role of ideology and political preferences of publically engaged economists and contribute to the debate on consensus in economics. To do so, we conduct a social network analysis on the signatories of economist petitions, which we identify as one channel for economists to exert public influence. We base our analysis on 77 public policy petitions and presidential anti-/endorsement letters from 2008-2017 in the United States with more than 6,400 signatories and check the robustness of our results with six sub-networks. Our contribution is twofold: On the one hand we provide an extended empirical basis for the debate on consensus in economics and the role of politics and ideology in economics. On the other hand we provide a viable tool to trace the ideological leaning of (prospective) economist petitions and economists based on the social structure of petition networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Beyer, Karl M. & Pühringer, Stephan, 2019. "Divided we stand? Professional consensus and political conflict in academic economics," Working Paper Series Ök-51, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cuswps:oek51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/206873/1/oek51.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/67ft27s7u58ocangahl1jigu6p is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Philipp Heimberger & Jakob Kapeller, 2017. "The performativity of potential output: pro-cyclicality and path dependency in coordinating European fiscal policies," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 904-928, September.
    3. Avner Offer & Gabriel Söderberg, 2016. "The Nobel Factor: The Prize in Economics, Social Democracy, and the Market Turn," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10841.
    4. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    5. Paola Sapienza & Luigi Zingales, 2013. "Economic Experts versus Average Americans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 636-642, May.
    6. Daniel B. Klein & Charlotta Stern, 2007. "Is There a Free‐Market Economist in the House? The Policy Views of American Economic Association Members," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 309-334, April.
    7. Backhouse,Roger E., 2010. "The Puzzle of Modern Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521825542.
    8. Cochoy, Franck & Giraudeau, Martin & McFall, Liz, 2010. "Performativity, economics and politics: an overview," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36820, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Frédéric Lebaron, 2018. "Pierre Bourdieu, Geometric Data Analysis and the Analysis of Economic Spaces and Fields," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3-4), pages 288-304, October.
    10. Daniel B. Klein & William L. Davis & Bob G. Figgins & David Hedengren, 2012. "Characteristics of the Members of Twelve Economic Associations: Voting, Policy Views, and Favorite Economists," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(2), pages 149-162, May.
    11. Robert Whaples, 2009. "The Policy Views of American Economic Association Members: The Results of a New Survey," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 6(3), pages 337-348, September.
    12. David Hedengren & Daniel B. Klein & Carrie Milton, 2010. "Economist Petitions: Ideology Revealed," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 7(3), pages 288-319, September.
    13. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    14. Roger Gordon & Gordon B. Dahl, 2013. "Views among Economists: Professional Consensus or Point-Counterpoint?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 629-635, May.
    15. Roger E. Backhouse & Steven G. Medema, 2012. "Economists and the analysis of government failure: fallacies in the Chicago and Virginia interpretations of Cambridge welfare economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(4), pages 981-994.
    16. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    17. Daniel B. Klein & William L. Davis & David Hedengren, 2013. "Economics Professors' Voting, Policy Views, Favorite Economists, and Frequent Lack of Consensus," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 116-125, January.
    18. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "La superioridad de los economistas," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 17(33), pages 13-43, July-Dece.
    19. Rojhat Avsar, 2011. "Mainstream Economic Rhetoric, Ideology and Institutions," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 137-158.
    20. T. Aldrich Finegan, 2014. "Counting Economics Phds: How Many New Graduates Do U.S. Universities Produce?1," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 59(1), pages 1-19, May.
    21. Frey, Bruno S, et al, 1984. "Consensus and Dissension among Economists: An Empirical Inquiry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 986-994, December.
    22. Dan Fuller & Doris Geide-Stevenson, 2014. "Consensus Among Economists-An Update," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 131-146, June.
    23. Franck Cochoy & Martin Giraudeau & Liz McFall, 2010. "Performativity, Economics And Politics," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 139-146, July.
    24. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226264141 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Ann Mari May & Mary G. McGarvey & David Kucera, 2018. "Gender and European Economic Policy: A Survey of the Views of European Economists on Contemporary Economic Policy," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 162-183, February.
    26. Backhouse,Roger E., 2010. "The Puzzle of Modern Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521532617.
    27. Mark Horowitz & Robert Hughes, 2018. "Political Identity and Economists’ Perceptions of Capitalist Crises," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(1), pages 173-193, March.
    28. Dan Fuller & Doris Geide-stevenson, 2003. "Consensus Among Economists: Revisited," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 369-387, December.
    29. Bob Jessop, 2013. "Recovered imaginaries, imagined recoveries: a cultural political economy of crisis construals and crisis management in the North Atlantic financial crisis," Chapters, in: Mats Benner (ed.), Before and Beyond the Global Economic Crisis, chapter 12, pages 234-254, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    30. Michel Callon, 2006. "What does it mean to say that economics is performative?," CSI Working Papers Series 005, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    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. Javdani, Mohsen & Chang, Ha-Joon, 2019. "Who Said or What Said? Estimating Ideological Bias in Views Among Economists," IZA Discussion Papers 12738, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Jakub Rybacki, 2019. "Are Central Banks' Research Teams Fragile Because of Groupthink?," KAE Working Papers 2019-045, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis.
    3. Sami Diaf & Jörg Döpke & Ulrich Fritsche & Ida Rockenbach, 2020. "Sharks and minnows in a shoal of words: Measuring latent ideological positions of German economic research institutes based on text mining techniques," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 202001, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    4. Diaf, Sami & Döpke, Jörg & Fritsche, Ulrich & Rockenbach, Ida, 2022. "Sharks and minnows in a shoal of words: Measuring latent ideological positions based on text mining techniques," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Svenja Flechtner, 2021. "Dimensions of Poverty. Measurement, Epistemic Injustices and Social Activism," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(2), pages 530-544, June.
    6. Jakub Rybacki, 2020. "Are Central Banks’ Research Teams Fragile Because of Groupthink in the Area of Monetary Policy? – Evidence on Inflation Targeting," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 4, pages 81-103.

    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. Javdani, Moshen & Chang, Ha-Joon, 2019. "Who Said or What Said? Estimating Ideological Bias in Views Among Economists," MPRA Paper 91958, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    3. Timothy C. Haab & John C. Whitehead, 2017. "What do Environmental and Resource Economists Think? Results from a Survey of AERE Members," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 43-58.
    4. Matthias Aistleitner & Stephan Puehringer, 2023. "Biased Trade Narratives and Its Influence on Development Studies: A Multi-level Mixed-Method Approach," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(6), pages 1322-1346, December.
    5. Matthias Aistleitner & Stephan Puehringer, 2020. "Exploring the trade (policy) narratives in economic elite discourse," ICAE Working Papers 110, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    6. Jakob Kapeller & Stephan Puehringer & Christian Grimm, 2022. "Paradigms and policies: the state of economics in the German-speaking countries," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 1183-1210, July.
    7. Christian Grimm & Jakob Kapeller & Stephan Puehringer, 2017. "Zum Profil der deutschsprachigen Volkswirtschaftslehre: Paradigmatische Ausrichtung und politische Orientierung deutschsprachiger Oekonom_innen (On the current state of German-speaking Economics: Para," ICAE Working Papers 70, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    8. Carlo D'Ippoliti, 2021. "“Many‐Citedness”: Citations Measure More Than Just Scientific Quality," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1271-1301, December.
    9. O’Neill, Donal, 2015. "Divided opinion on the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013: Random or systematic differences?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 175-178.
    10. Zamagni, Stefano, 2021. "The quest for an axiological reorientation of economic science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 391-401.
    11. Stephan Puehringer, 2016. "Still the queen of the social sciences? (Post-)Crisis power balances of 'public economists' in Germany," ICAE Working Papers 52, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    12. Corsi, Marcella & D’Ippoliti, Carlo & Zacchia, Giulia, 2019. "Diversity of backgrounds and ideas: The case of research evaluation in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    13. Claudius Graebner & Stephan Puehringer, 2021. "Competition universalism: Its historical origins and timely alternatives," ICAE Working Papers 125, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    14. Brooks, Chris & Schopohl, Lisa & Walker, James T., 2023. "Comparing perceptions of the impact of journal rankings between fields," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Andrew Mearman & Sebastian Berger & Danielle Guizzo, 2016. "Curriculum reform in UK economics: a critique," Working Papers 20161611, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    16. Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Thoma, Johanna, 2018. "Book review: economics rules," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84173, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Jishnu Das & Quy-Toan Do, 2020. "US and them - The geography of academic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 111-114, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    19. Joshua Aizenman & Kenneth Kletzer, 2020. "Networking, citations of academic research, and premature death," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 51-55, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    20. Michael E. Rose, 2022. "Small world: Narrow, wide, and long replication of Goyal, van der Leij and Moraga‐Gonzélez (JPE 2006) and a comparison of EconLit and Scopus," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 820-828, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social network analysis; sociology of economics; consensus; public economists; economist petitions; United States;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • B20 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - General
    • B30 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - General
    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation
    • E66 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - General Outlook and Conditions
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    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:zbw:cuswps:oek51. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cusanus-hochschule.de/forschung/institut-fuer-oekonomie/ .

    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.