IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05037009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technocracy, Knowledge Regime and the Anti-free Market Attitude of French Economists
[Technocratie, régime de connaissance et attitude anti-libre marché des économistes français]

Author

Listed:
  • François Facchini

    (UP1 UFR02 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - École d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This article contributes to the economics of economics. It explains the distrust of French economists in the market economy and their interest in the construction of techniques to aid public decision-making. French economists are in favor of various forms of interventionism because they are hired by the government to produce the techniques of government that allow the State to replace the contract and the price mechanism and because to be an economist today one must unknowingly adopt a scientistic posture, in other words learn the tools of government economics. The French status quo can partly be explained by this technocratic ideal of government.

Suggested Citation

  • François Facchini, 2025. "Technocracy, Knowledge Regime and the Anti-free Market Attitude of French Economists [Technocratie, régime de connaissance et attitude anti-libre marché des économistes français]," Post-Print hal-05037009, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05037009
    DOI: 10.1515/jeeh-2024-0016
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05037009v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05037009v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jeeh-2024-0016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scheall, Scott & Butos, William N. & McQuade, Thomas, 2019. "Social and scientific disorder as epistemic phenomena, or the consequences of government dietary guidelines," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 431-447, June.
    2. Frey, Bruno S, 2003. "Publishing as Prostitution?--Choosing between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 116(1-2), pages 205-223, July.
    3. François Facchini, 2016. "Political ideological shift: A theoretical approach," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01350612, HAL.
    4. Walter Enders & Gary Hoover, 2006. "Plagiarism in the Economics Profession: A Survey," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 92-107.
    5. John L. Campbell & Ove K. Pedersen, 2014. "The National Origins of Policy Ideas: Knowledge Regimes in the United States, France, Germany, and Denmark," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10265.
    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. Facchini François, 2024. "Technocracy, Knowledge Regime and the Anti-free Market Attitude of French Economists," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 30(1), pages 23-46.
    2. François Facchini, 2025. "Technocracy, Knowledge Regime and the Anti-free Market Attitude of French Economists [Technocratie, régime de connaissance et attitude anti-libre marché des économistes français]," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-05037009, HAL.
    3. Necker, Sarah, 2014. "Scientific misbehavior in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1747-1759.
    4. Müller, Harry, 2012. "Die Zitationshäufigkeit als Qualitätsindikator im Rahmen der Forschungsleistungsmessung," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 1/2012, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    5. Engelbert Stockhammer & Paul Ramskogler, 2009. "Post-Keynesian economics How to move forward," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 6(2), pages 227-246.
    6. Julia Jerke & Antonia Velicu & Fabian Winter & Heiko Rauhut, 2025. "Publication bias in the social sciences since 1959: Application of a regression discontinuity framework," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-27, February.
    7. Hoff, Jens V. & Rasmussen, Martin M.B. & Sørensen, Peter Birch, 2021. "Barriers and opportunities in developing and implementing a Green GDP," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    8. Oswald, Andrew J., 2015. "The Objective Measurement of World-Leading Research," IZA Discussion Papers 8829, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Ow Yong, Lai Meng & Cameron, Ailsa, 2019. "Learning from elsewhere: Integrated care development in Singapore," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(4), pages 393-402.
    10. Martin B. Carstensen & Christian Lyhne Ibsen & Vivien A. Schmidt, 2022. "Ideas and power in employment relations studies," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 3-21, January.
    11. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    12. Müller, Harry, 2013. "Zur Ethik von Rankings im Hochschulwesen: Eine Betrachtung aus ökonomischer Perspektive," CIW Discussion Papers 1/2013, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    13. Libman, A., 2011. "German Economics: Mechanisms of Transformation," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 9, pages 129-149.
    14. Christoph Siemroth, 2024. "Economics Peer-Review: Problems, Recent Developments, and Reform Proposals," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 69(2), pages 241-258, October.
    15. Eric W. K. Tsang & Bruno S. Frey, 2006. "The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-09, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    16. Hatzinikolaou, Dimitris, 2012. "Failure in the market for reviewing economics papers: Good readers, bad referees, and ugly papers," MPRA Paper 45384, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Sep 2012.
    17. Rouven Reinke & Laura Porak, 2023. "The charm of emission trading: Ideas of German public economists on economic policy in times of crises," ICAE Working Papers 145, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    18. Stephan B. Bruns, 2013. "Identifying Genuine Effects in Observational Research by Means of Meta-Regressions," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-040, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    19. J. W. Fedderke, 2013. "The objectivity of national research foundation peer review in South Africa assessed against bibliometric indexes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 177-206, November.
    20. Dilger, Alexander, 2017. "Zur Stärkung wissenschaftlicher Kritik [On strengthening of academic critique]," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 8/2017, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:hal:journl:hal-05037009. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.