:Analogies for Sustainable Development/Homo economicus

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Overview[edit | edit source]

Homo economicus is the fictional species created by economists to describe a model of human behavior.

Analogy Map[edit | edit source]

Discussion[edit | edit source]

Quote Bank[edit | edit source]

"The only people who still take the model seriously are economists themselves. There is an element of projection in this; studies have shown that economists tend to resemble homo economicus more than the rest of us do. Nevertheless the model remains the ghost in the machinery of economic analysis, and defines in large measure our sense of the possible. When ideologues argue that our only choice is between a corporate market and a bureaucratic state, it is the assumption of homo economicus that makes this so."[1]

"Homo economicus was from the beginning a polemical construct, devised to serve political ends. At first this was to help undermine the secular authority of the Roman Church, and then the divine right of kings. More recently it has served to justify a fundamentalism of what is called “the market.” Along the way, it has provided economists with the semblance of a predictable atom of economic activity. This has enabled them to declaim under the banner of “science,” and has given them a hook on which to hang their arcane math."[2]


" Where the cancer researcher fixates on the individual cell or gene, the economist does so on a hypothetical molecule of economic action called homo economicus. This is the character that inhabits the economics texts, and the computer models that are the silent dictators of analysis and policy. Econ, as I will call him, is a myopic integer of self-seeking, who goes through life with a relentless and unfailing calculus of personal loss and gain. He has no social affinities, is oblivious of social context, and has no capacity or inclination to think of anyone besides him or her self."

"Basically he represents the psycho-emotional development of a three year old, only with better math skills. And this notion of human nature frames both the desired ends of policy and the means deemed possible for attaining them. Success is when he gratifies his supposed desires by spending more money. Failure is when he spends less."

"Either we can try to bribe this slug to be more responsible, through tax breaks and the like. (This is called “market-based” policy.”) Or else we impose rules and regulations to whip him into shape. Both are necessary of course. But necessary is not sufficient. It is not possible to create a tax bribe for every good thing that needs to happen, nor a regulatory cudgel to stop everything that is bad. " [3]

References[edit | edit source]

  1. Rowe, J. (2016) Why Economics Is Really Psychology on Steroids. Evonomics. http://evonomics.com/why-economics-is-really-psychology-on-steroids/
  2. Rowe, J. (2016) Why Economics Is Really Psychology on Steroids. Evonomics. http://evonomics.com/why-economics-is-really-psychology-on-steroids/
  3. Rowe, J. (2009) The Tragedy of Economics: Market Theory Vs. Human Nature. OntheCommons.org. http://jonathanrowe.org/the-tragedy-of-economics-market-theory-vs-human-nature