Apologies for cross-posting. Please circulate
Please take care to send any replies to the author, not to the lists
or individuals to which this message has been posted.
Dear Colleagues
On behalf of the Association for Heterodox Economics (AHE) I am
circulating, for comment and consultation, a draft paper on
'Benchmarking for Pluralism'. This has been prepared, on behalf of
the AHE, for submission to a special edition of the International
Review of Economics Education (IREE). This special invitation is to
be guest edited by Andy Denis on the AHE's behalf.
To access the article, please follow this link:
<http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/15691.html>http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/15691.html
If you experience difficulties, please contact me, Alan Freeman, at
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
The article arises from the work the AHE has carried out over the
past three years in response to successive consultations on the UK's
Quality Assurance (QAA) subject benchmark for economics, and on the
impact of the UK's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). It endorses
the view, expressed by Colander et al (2009) that economics has
suffered 'systemic failure'. It suggests that this systemic failure
is the outcome of a 'regulatory capture' of economics. Both the
capture, and the consequent systemic failure, arise from an
evolutionary, institutionalised mechanism to 'select for conformity'.
This has worked, effectively, to exclude from consideration by the
profession, at all levels, precisely those approaches and theories
most critical of the practices that led to the present crisis. It is
this inbuilt tendency that has produced the systemic failure of the
profession. This tendency has been reenforced, rather than countered,
by the RAE and QAA processes. An alternative process, which selects
for diversity, critical analysis, controversy and dissent, is
required in their place.
Although the QAA and RAE are specific to the UK, the proposals in the
article are for the above reasons of wider significance, since they
relate to a systemic, instititional practice which is worldwide, and
which the UK procedures merely re-enforce.
The paper argues that the antidote is a systematic requirement for
pluralism at all levels and in particular in teaching. In outlining a
pluralistic benchmark for education, it suggests what is in effect
the basis for a code of conduct for economics.
Although the special issue is in an advanced state of preparation -
thanks to Andy's dedicated work - we nevertheless want to ensure that
the AHE and the wider economics community has as much input into the
final result as possible. It would be greatly appreciated if you
could take the time to read the proposed article, and send any
comments directly to myself at
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask] If you have private
comments you do not wish to share please pass them to Andy Denis at
"Denis, Andy" <mailto:[log in to unmask]><[log in to unmask]>
Please also feel free to circulate this message to networks you are
involved in, and to interested colleagues.
Reference:
Colander, D., Hans Foellmer, Armin Haas, Michael Goldberg, Katarina
Juselius, Alan Kirman, et al., 2009. 'The Financial Crisis and the
Systemic Failure of Academic Economics'.
Kind regards
Alan Freeman
Coordinator,
Association for Heterodox Economics
|
