|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
The Superiority of Economists
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2015-7-45-72
Abstract
In this essay, we analyze the dominant position of economics within the network of the social sciences in the United States. We begin by documenting the relative insularity of economics, using bibliometric data. Next we analyze the tight management of the field from the top down, which gives economics its characteristic hierarchical structure. Economists also distinguish themselves from other social scientists through their much better material situation (many teach in business schools, have external consulting activities), their more individualist worldviews, and their confidence in their discipline’s ability to fix the world’s problems. Taken together, these traits constitute what we call the superiority of economists, where economists’ objective supremacy is intimately linked with their subjective sense of authority and entitlement. While this superiority has certainly fueled economists’ practical involvement and their considerable influence over the economy, it has also exposed them more to conflicts of interests, political critique, even derision.
About the Authors
M. Fourcade
University of California (Berkeley, California); Max Planck-Sciences Po Center, Sciences Po (Paris, France)
United States
United States
E. Ollion
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Strasbourg (France)
France
France
Y. Algan
Max Planck-Sciences Po Center, Sciences Po (Paris, France)
France
France
References
1. Fourcade M., Ollion E., Algan Y. (2015). The Superiority of Economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 29, No 1, pp. 89-114. Печатается с разрешения авторов и Американской экономической ассоциации
2. Abbott A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Abbott A. (2005). The idea of outcome in U.S. sociology. In: G. Steinmetz (ed.). The politics of methods in the human sciences: Positivism and Its epistemological others, pp. 393-426.
4. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Angrist J. D., Pischke J.-S. (2010). The credibility revolution in empirical economics: How better research design is taking the con out of econometrics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 24, No. 2, рр. 3-30.
5. Banerjee A. V., Duflo E. (2013). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. N. Y.: Random House.
6. Baron J. N., Hannan M. T. (1994). The impact of economics on contemporary sociology. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 32, No. 3, рр. 1111-1146.
7. Blau F. D. (2006). Report of the committee on the status of women in the economics profession. American Economic Review, Vol. 96, No. 2, pp. 519-526.
8. Blyth M. (2002). Great transformations: Economic ideas and institutional change in the twentieth century. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press.
9. Bourdieu P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Bourdieu P. (1988). Homo academicus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
11. Bourdieu P., Wacquant L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Bowles S. (1998). Endogenous preferences: The cultural consequences of markets and other economic institutions. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 75-111.
13. Callon M. (1998). Introduction: The embeddedness of economic markets in economics. In: M. Callon (ed.). The laws of the markets, pp. 1-57. Oxford: Blackwell.
14. Card D., DellaVigna S. (2013). Nine facts about top journals in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 144-161.
15. Clemens E. S., Powell W. W., McIlwaine K., Okamoto D. (1995). Careers in print: Books, journals, and scholarly reputations. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 101, No. 2, pp. 433-494.
16. Colander D. (2005). The making of an economist redux. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 175-198.
17. Cole S. (1983). The hierarchy of the sciences? American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 89, No. 1, pp. 111-139.
18. Coupé T. (2004). Revealed performances: Worldwide rankings of economists and economics departments 1969-2000. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: http:// web.archive.org/web/20070717101024/http://homepages.ulb.ac.be/~tcoupe/ updaterevealedperformances.pdf.
19. Ellison G. (2010). How does the market use citation data? The hirsch index in economics. NBER Working Paper, No. 16419.
20. Fehr E., Hoff K. (2011). Introduction: tastes, castes and culture: The influence of society on preferences. Economic Journal, Vol. 121, No. 556, pp. F396-F412.
21. Fligstein N., Shin T. (2007). Shareholder value and the transformation of the U.S. economy, 1984-2000. Sociological Forum, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 399-424.
22. Fourcade M. (2006). The construction of a global profession: The transnationalization of economics. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 112, No. 1, pp. 145-194.
23. Fourcade M. (2009). Economists and societies: Discipline and profession in the United States, Great Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
24. Fourcade M., Khurana R. (2013). From social control to financial economics: The linked ecologies of economics and business in twentieth century America. Theory and Society, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 121-159.
25. Frank D. J., Gabler J. (2006). Reconstructing the university: Worldwide shifts in academia in the 20th century. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
26. Frank R. H., Gilovich Th., Regan D. T. (1993). Does Studying Economics Inhibit Cooperation? Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 159-171.
27. Freeman R. B. (1999). It’s better being an economist (but don’t tell anyone). Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 139-145.
28. Frey B. S., Meier S. (2005). Selfish and indoctrinated economists? European Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 165-171.
29. Godechot O. (2011). How did the neoclassical paradigm conquer a multi-disciplinary research institution? Revue de la régulation: [On-line serial], No. 10. http:// regulation.revues.org/9429.
30. Gross N. (2013). Why are professors liberal and why do conservatives care? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Gross N., Simmons S. (2007). The social and political views of american professors. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/dow nload?doi=10.1.1.147.6141&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
32. Hamermesh D. S. (2013). Six decades of top economics publishing: Who and how? Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 162-172.
33. Han S.-K. (2003). Tribal regimes in academia: A comparative analysis of market structure across disciplines. Social Networks, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 251-280.
34. Hansen W. L. (1991). The education and training of economics doctorates: Major findings of the executive secretary of the american economic association’s commission on graduate education in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 1054-1087.
35. Haskell Th. L. (2000). The emergence of professional social science: The American social science association and the nineteenth-century crisis of authority. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
36. Heilbron J., Verhael J., Quak S. (2014). The origins and early diffusion of ‘shareholder value’ in the United States. Theory and Society, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 1-22.
37. Hirshman D., Popp Berman E. (2014). Do economists make policies? On the political effects of economics. Socio-Economic Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 779-811.
38. Isaac J. (2010). Theorist at work: Talcott parsons and the Carnegie project on theory, 1949-1951. Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 71, No. 2, pp. 287-311.
39. Jacobs J. A. (2013). In defense of disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and specialization in the research university. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Jelveh Z., Kogut B., Naidu S. (2014). Political language in economics. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: http://wp.nyu.edu/zj292/wp-content/uploads/sites/ 1011/2014/12/political_language_in_economics.pdf.
41. Jovanovic F. (2008). The construction of the canonical history of financial economics. History of Political Economy, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 213-242.
42. Jung J., Dobbin F. (2012). Finance and institutional investors. In: K. Knorr Cetina, A. Preda (eds.). The Oxford handbook of the sociology of finance, pp. 52-74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43. Kelly M. A., Bruestle S. (2011). Trends of subjects published in economic journals, 1969-2007. Economic Inquiry, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 658-673.
44. Keynes J. M. (1962 [1931]). Essays in persuasion. N. Y.: W. W. Norton.
45. Кейнс Дж. М. (2009). Экономические возможности наших внуков // Вопросы экономики. № 6. С. 60-67.
46. Krugman P. (2009). How did economists get it so wrong? New York Times Magazine. September 2.
47. Laband D. N., Piette M. J. (1994). Favoritism versus search for good papers: Empirical evidence regarding the behavior of journal editors. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 194-203.
48. Ladd E. C., Lipset S. M. (1976). The divided academy: Professors and politics. N. Y.: W. W. Norton & Company.
49. Lamont M. (2009). How professors think: Inside the curious world of academic judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Review
For citations:
Fourcade M., Ollion E., Algan Y. The Superiority of Economists. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2015;(7):45-72. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2015-7-45-72
Views:
1405
Email this article 
