宏观经济学有DSGE的未来吗?

D. Colander
{"title":"宏观经济学有DSGE的未来吗?","authors":"D. Colander","doi":"10.1080/08911916.2021.1944593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) macro theory has lots of problems, many of them nicely listed and outlined in Servaas Storm’s article, “Cordon of Conformity: Why DSGE Models Are Not the Future of Macroeconomics.” Recognition of those fallacies is useful reading, but is unlikely to change the current state of macro theory, which is deeply entangled with DSGE elements. A major reason why is that the arguments for macroeconomic intervention versus nonintervention are, to a large degree, not based on macro theory. They are based on moral, empirical, and institutional judgements that extend far beyond economics. Neither critics nor DSGE economists discuss them, and both allow macro theory to hide those judgments.","PeriodicalId":44784,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY","volume":"50 1","pages":"99 - 102"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Macroeconomics Have a DSGE Future?\",\"authors\":\"D. Colander\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08911916.2021.1944593\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) macro theory has lots of problems, many of them nicely listed and outlined in Servaas Storm’s article, “Cordon of Conformity: Why DSGE Models Are Not the Future of Macroeconomics.” Recognition of those fallacies is useful reading, but is unlikely to change the current state of macro theory, which is deeply entangled with DSGE elements. A major reason why is that the arguments for macroeconomic intervention versus nonintervention are, to a large degree, not based on macro theory. They are based on moral, empirical, and institutional judgements that extend far beyond economics. Neither critics nor DSGE economists discuss them, and both allow macro theory to hide those judgments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"99 - 102\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08911916.2021.1944593\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08911916.2021.1944593","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要动态随机一般均衡(DSGE)宏观理论有很多问题,其中许多问题在Servaas Storm的文章《一致性准则:为什么DSGE模型不是宏观经济学的未来》中得到了很好的列举和概述。认识到这些谬论是有用的读物,但不太可能改变宏观理论的现状,因为宏观理论与DSGE元素纠缠得很深。一个主要原因是,宏观经济干预与不干预的论点在很大程度上不是基于宏观理论。它们基于远远超出经济学范畴的道德、经验和制度判断。批评者和DSGE经济学家都没有讨论它们,都允许宏观理论掩盖这些判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Does Macroeconomics Have a DSGE Future?
Abstract Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) macro theory has lots of problems, many of them nicely listed and outlined in Servaas Storm’s article, “Cordon of Conformity: Why DSGE Models Are Not the Future of Macroeconomics.” Recognition of those fallacies is useful reading, but is unlikely to change the current state of macro theory, which is deeply entangled with DSGE elements. A major reason why is that the arguments for macroeconomic intervention versus nonintervention are, to a large degree, not based on macro theory. They are based on moral, empirical, and institutional judgements that extend far beyond economics. Neither critics nor DSGE economists discuss them, and both allow macro theory to hide those judgments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
Alain Parguez and Monetary Circuit Theory: Keys to Understanding the Development of Economies with a Double Monetary Standard Tilting at Windmills: Bernanke and Blanchard’s Obsession with the Wage-Price Spiral Inflation in France Since the 1960s: A Post-Keynesian Interpretation Using the Conflict-Inflation Model An Assessment of Pandemic Era Inflation, 2021–2022 Elaborating on the Demand-Side of Economic Development: Schumpeter and Neo-Schumpeterian Theory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1