IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/asi/aeafrj/v6y2016i3p151-161id1472.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economics Imperialism: SWOT Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Slavica Manic

Abstract

It's been a quarter of century since one of the founders of economic imperialism was crowned with glory and awarded for the establishing of hitherto non-conventional economic approach. Application of analytical tools of economic analysis on non-economic issues has proved that economic science has the capacity and the ability to step outside traditional boundaries of the discipline. Trend of economics’ engaging with neighboring disciplines has dramatically increased since that time. Not only the narrow mainstream methodology has greatly expanded, but it proceeded in a way that the range of topics, subjected to economics’ influence, seemed to be endless. And economics imperialism continued to evolve, changing only its forms from aggressive to sophisticated one. Although suited to meet economics aspirations, it surely enabled more detailed and thorough understanding of diverse social phenomena. In spite of the fact that economics itself experienced remarkable improvements, owing to such kind of imperialism, its continuous challenging and compromising did not cease to be questioned. That is why this paper is intended to sketch SWOT analysis of economics imperialism. More precisely, its purpose is twofold: a) to review what literature lately offered about justification of economic imperialism; b) to analyze whether weaknesses it produced, within economics as well as threats stemming from outside discipline’s borders, may jeopardize future progress of economic science. We believe that this approach might be helpful for future studies, assessing in what extent the unification of the mainstream and his methodical empowerment are still sufficient to compensate limitations, imposed by economics imperialism.

Suggested Citation

  • Slavica Manic, 2016. "Economics Imperialism: SWOT Analysis," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 6(3), pages 151-161.
    • Handle: RePEc:asi:aeafrj:v:6:y:2016:i:3:p:151-161:id:1472
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://archive.aessweb.com/index.php/5002/article/view/1472/2117
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stigler, George J, 1984. " Economics-The Imperial Science?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 301-313.
    2. Matthew T. Panhans & John D. Singleton, 2015. "The Empirical Economist's Toolkit: From Models to Methods," Center for the History of Political Economy Working Paper Series 2015-3, Center for the History of Political Economy.
    3. Frederic S. Lee, 2007. "The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(2), pages 309-325, March.
    4. Bruno S. Frey & Matthias Benz, 2004. "From Imperialism to Inspiration: A Survey of Economics and Psychology," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & Alain Marciano & Jochen Runde (ed.), The Elgar Companion To Economics and Philosophy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Starbuck, William H., 2009. "The constant causes of never-ending faddishness in the behavioral and social sciences," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 108-116, March.
    6. Arthur Diamond, 2009. "Fixing ideas: how research is constrained by mandated formalism," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 191-206.
    7. John B. Davis & Alain Marciano & Jochen Runde (ed.), 2004. "The Elgar Companion To Economics and Philosophy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2696.
    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. Slavica Manic, 2016. "Economics Imperialism: SWOT Analysis," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 6(3), pages 151-161, March.
    2. Anna Carabelli & Mario Cedrini, 2011. "The Economic Problem of Happiness: Keynes on Happiness and Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 40(3), pages 335-359, October.
    3. Mario A. Cedrini & Roberto Marchionatti, 2017. "On the Theoretical and Practical Relevance of the Concept of Gift to the Development of a Non-imperialist Economics," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 49(4), pages 633-649, December.
    4. Stavros A. Drakopoulos, 2020. "Pay Level Comparisons in Job Satisfaction Research and Mainstream Economic Methodology," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 825-842, March.
    5. Groß Steffen W., 2010. "Warum sich Ökonomen (wieder) mit Philosophie beschäftigen sollten – und Philosophen (wieder) mit Ökonomie / Why Economists should be more interested in Philosophy (again) – and why Philosophers should," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 61(1), pages 75-94, January.
    6. Mario Cedrini & Magda Fontana, 2018. "Just another niche in the wall? How specialization is changing the face of mainstream economics [Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and the sciences]," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 42(2), pages 427-451.
    7. Margit Osterloh & Bruno S. Frey, 2009. "Research Governance in Academia: Are there Alternatives to Academic Rankings?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    8. Cedrini, Mario & Fontana, Magda, 2015. "Mainstreaming. Reflections on the Origins and Fate of Mainstream Pluralism," CESMEP Working Papers 201501, University of Turin.
    9. Drakopoulos, Stavros A. & Katselidis, Ioannis, 2017. "The Relationship between Psychology and Economics: Insights from the History of Economic Thought," MPRA Paper 77485, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Franck Bailly, 2022. "When mainstream economics does human resource management: a critique of personnel economics’ prescriptive ambition," Post-Print hal-03711945, HAL.
    11. Stavros, Drakopoulos, 2021. "The Relation of Neoclassical Economics to other Disciplines: The case of Physics and Psychology," MPRA Paper 106597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Bianchi, Ana Maria, 2010. "A propósito de Antonio Maria: tendências recentes da metodologia econômica [On behalf of Antonio Maria: recent tendencies in economic methodology]," MPRA Paper 20571, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. George Gotsis & Zoi Kortezi, 2008. "Philosophical Foundations of Workplace Spirituality: A Critical Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 575-600, April.
    14. Katja Rost & Margit Osterloh, 2008. "You Pay a Fee for Strong Beliefs: Homogeneity as a Driver of Corporate Governance Failure," CREMA Working Paper Series 2008-28, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    15. Paolo Silvestri, 2016. "Disputed (Disciplinary) Boundaries: Philosophy, Economics and Value Judgments," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 24(3), pages 187-221.
    16. Christopher J. Ruhm, 2019. "Shackling the Identification Police?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(4), pages 1016-1026, April.
    17. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Mehmet Nar, 2015. "The Effects of Behavioral Economics on Tax Amnesty," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 5(2), pages 580-589.
    19. Vikas Kumar, 2012. "Cartels in the Kautiliya Arthasastra," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 59-79, March.
    20. Yang, Bijou & Lester, David, 1995. "New directions for economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 433-446.

    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:asi:aeafrj:v:6:y:2016:i:3:p:151-161:id:1472. 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: Robert Allen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://archive.aessweb.com/index.php/5002/ .

    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.