real-world economics review, issue no. 100 subscribe for free
Issue no. 49, 2009
A financial crisis on top of the ecological crisis: Ending the monopoly of neoclassical economics Peter Söderbaum [School of Sustainable Development of Society and Technology, Sweden]
Copyright: Peter Söderbaum , 2022
You may post comments on this paper at https://rwer.wordpress.com/comments-on-rwer-issue-no-100/
Introduction A number of unsustainable trends, such as those related to climate change, biological diversity, environmental pollution, depleting fish stocks, deforestation, accumulating radioactive waste threaten people in different parts of the world and globally. In addition to this we are experiencing a financial crisis. Something appears to be seriously wrong with the mental maps of influential actors in different parts of the world. In both cases of crisis, the tendency is to blame market actors for their greediness and risk behavior or national governments for the lack of relevant regulation, or both. I will here argue that among potential explanatory factors we also need to include ideas about the role of science in society, paradigms in economics, established political ideologies (and other ideologies) as well as institutional arrangements. This means that also science and universities are involved. It is argued that the monopoly position of neoclassical economics at university departments of economics has played a significant role by influencing the mental maps of many actors and making them more legitimate. Even the so called Nobel Prize in economics is part of this picture.
Economics as a socially constructed language Traditionally, science has been seen as being separate from politics. Positivism as a theory of science has dominated the scene to the exclusion almost of other perspectives. Science is then about searching for the truth, and what is thought of as reliable knowledge is provided to colleagues in the scientific community, politicians and other actors in society through educational activities, books, articles, research reports etc. The positivistic tradition is one where the scholar is standing outside observing what goes on in society, formulating and testing hypotheses. The scholar is responsible mainly to the scientific community. It is a limited responsibility doctrine. B e f a e e f c e ce. B a Fa a c ed e e e ec (1996) to counteract the idea that only one theory of science and one disciplinary paradigm at a time e e e e .N a eee e a e ee a a age a d e ec e relation to a specific category of phenomena. Viewing reality from a second perspective often adds to the understanding offered by the first.
30