Tony Yates o tem, zakaj so akademski ekonomisti premalo prisotni v javnih diskusijah: (1) ker za to niso plačani, pač pa za pedagoško in raziskovalno delo (objave), (2) ker vse, kar šteje v akademskem svetu in po čemer se meri uspešnost univerz ali profesorjev, so znanstvene objave, in (3) ker so akademiki izjemno slabi v komuniciranju svojih stališč ali pa so popolni fahidioti in ne znajo povedati nič smiselnega o stvareh izven zelo ozke specializacije, s katero se ukvarjajo (primer Nobelovcev).
Danny Blanchflower remarked on Twitter that UK economic discourse lacked much engagement from academics. This was a follow-up to a Paul Krugman post where he disparaged UK economic discourse, and used as his metric the fact that there was a lot of focus on the deficit. And that in turn derives from Simon Wren Lewis’ developing caricature of UK’s ‘mediamacro’.
Well, this blog is about why – supposing the assessment of our discourse to be true, which I don’t really accept in the way it was put – you shouldn’t blame the academics. Or perhaps anyone, except the market.
The first reason why is that there is little or no financial incentive to take part.
UK economics departments are partly assessed on ‘impact’. But there is almost no link to that and me, for example, piling into a debate about whether inflation 2pp below the BoE’s target is, as George…
View original post 913 more words