IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/safiwp/97-10-080.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Should Policymakers Know About Economic Complexity?

Author

Listed:
  • Steven N. Durlauf

Abstract

1. Introduction This essay is written with two goals. The first is to outline the main ideas underlying the growing study of complex economic environments. The second is to suggest areas of public policy where those ideas might be important. Both goals are necessarily speculative. The study of complex systems, whether natural or social, is still in its infancy. While many insights and plausible conjectures have been generated, the long term importance of this work is still unclear. In formal analyses, complexity denotes something quite different from merely "complicated" or "hard to analyze or solve." For our purposes, a system is said to be complex when it exhibits some type of order as a result of the interactions of many heterogeneous objects. When the interactions occur at a level of description other than that at which the patterns occur, these patterns are often called "emergent." Hence magnetism, which is a property of a large number of iron atoms (in this case with spins polarized in one direction) is an emergent property. Economists have begun to use complex systems as the basis for formal modeling precisely in order to understand certain aggregate features of environments which are characterized by many heterogeneous actors. Examples are easy to construct. A stock market is comprised of many traders with idiosyncratic beliefs about the future. The actors exchange information and react to some types of common information, but stock prices are ultimately determined by a large number of decentralized buy and sell decisions. In a very different area, the composition of residential communities is determined by the individual preferences and location decisions of individual families. Notice that in each case, there is a feedback between the aggregate characteristics of the economic environment under analysis and the individual actors which comprise that environment. Movements in stock prices influence the beliefs of individual traders and in turn influence their subsequent decisions. Families make community choices on the basis of expectations concerning community characteristics; these characteristics in turn evolve in response to individual choices. These feedbacks are in and of themselves not unique to complex environments. After all, elementary economics teaches us about the feedback between individual demand and supply decisions and market level prices. Complexity deepens our understanding of economic phenomena by illustrating how various types of microeconomic structures lead to particular aggregate economic phenomena. For example, as illustrated in work by W. Brian Arthur, John Holland, Blake LeBaron, and Richard Palmer [1] booms and crashes in prices appears to be a frequent feature of stock market environments in which evolving rules-of-thumb behavior interact to determine individual purchasing decisions. Similarly, the emergence of racially segregated neighborhoods from a collection of individuals with different preferences for community racial composition has been illustrated by Thomas Schelling [2], in what is probably the first paper on economic complexity. Hence, the value of complex system thinking in the social sciences, for either researchers or policymakers, lies in its potential for enriching our understanding of the relationships between aggregate outcomes and individual decisions. While plausible theoretical complexity-based models have been developed to explain phenomena ranging from out of wedlock births (William Brock and Steven Durlauf) [3] to the distribution of city sizes (Paul Krugman) [4], these models have not been subjected to sufficient empirical scrutiny to assess their validity. In particular, the causal mechanisms which drive these models have yet to be shown to be empirically salient.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven N. Durlauf, 1997. "What Should Policymakers Know About Economic Complexity?," Working Papers 97-10-080, Santa Fe Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:safiwp:97-10-080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Durston, John, 1999. "Building community social capital," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), December.
    2. Brock, William A., 2000. "Whither nonlinear?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 24(5-7), pages 663-678, June.
    3. Stephen J. Decanio, 1999. "Estimating The Non-Environmental Consequences Of Greenhouse Gas Reductions Is Harder Than You Think," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 17(3), pages 279-295, July.
    4. Alejandro Reveiz Herault, 2008. "Artificial Markets under a Complexity Perspective," Borradores de Economia 510, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    5. Bruna Bruno & Marisa Faggini & Anna Parziale, 2016. "Complexity Modelling in Economics: the State of the Art," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 5(2), pages 29-43, September.
    6. Dimitris Kremmydas, 2012. "Agent based modeling for agricultural policy evaluation: A review," Working Papers 2012-3, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic policy; social interactions; complex systems;

    JEL classification:

    • C60 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - General

    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:wop:safiwp:97-10-080. 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: (Thomas Krichel). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/epstfus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.