IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ude/wpaper/0322.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consensos, disensos e ideología: el caso de los economistas en Uruguay

Author

Listed:
  • Verónica Amarante
  • Marisa Bucheli
  • Cecilia Lara

Abstract

Este artículo analiza el grado de consenso entre los economistas en relación con diversas temáticas económicas para el caso uruguayo. A través de una encuesta en línea, y en base a una escala tipo Likert de cinco niveles, se recoge el nivel de apoyo a 39 proposiciones sobre temas económicos. Se concluye que la tendencia al consenso fuerte y sustancial es menor a la encontrada en otros países. Los mayores niveles de acuerdo se detectan en preguntas relativas a discriminación y, en menor medida, a temas ambientales. También se detecta acuerdo en la necesidad de mayor equidad de ingresos y en la importancia del rol del Estado para alcanzarla, pero no hay consenso sobre las herramientas redistributivas. En base a un análisis de correspondencia múltiple y utilizando la metodología de clusters, se distinguen dos grupos diferenciados en función de sus opiniones sobre temas económicos. La pertenencia a uno u otro grupo está fuertemente asociada al posicionamiento ideológico del economista.

Suggested Citation

  • Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & Cecilia Lara, 2022. "Consensos, disensos e ideología: el caso de los economistas en Uruguay," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0322, Department of Economics - dECON.
    • Handle: RePEc:ude:wpaper:0322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/31716
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economistas; consenso; opiniones;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics

    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:ude:wpaper:0322. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Andrea Doneschi or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/derauuy.html .

    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.