Do Economists Recognize an Opportunity Cost When They See One? A Dismal Performance or an Arbitrary Concept?
Ferraro and Taylor (2005) asked 199 professional economists a multiple-choice question about opportunity cost. Given that only 21.6% answered “correctly,” they conclude that professional understanding of the concept is “dismal.” We challenge this critique of the profession. Specifically, we allow for alternative opportunity cost accounting methodologies—one of which is derived from the term's definition as found in Ferraro and Taylor— and rely on the conventional relationship between willingness to pay and substitute goods to demonstrate that every answer to the multiple-choice question is defensible. The Ferraro and Taylor survey question suggests difficulties in framing an opportunity cost accounting question, as well as a lack of coordination in opportunity cost accounting methodology. In scope and logic, we conclude that the survey question does not, however, succeed in measuring professional understanding of opportunity cost. A discussion follows as to the concept's appropriate role in the classroom.
Volume (Year): 79 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.southerneconomic.org/|
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:79:2:y:2012:p:248-256. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laura Razzolini)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.