In the absence of major wars, modern society is largely a functioning economic society. The economic operation of the complex world needs to be regulated or guided by various economic policies, hence the participation of economists is indispensable. With the economy rapidly developed, economics became prominent. Even in socialist China, where the old planned economy has been abandoned in favor of a market economy, Western economics has played an important role in the formulation of Chinese economic policy.
Looking from the perspective of world history, economists have played different roles in different historical periods. After World War II, Keynesian economics was embraced by the world, and the idea of government intervention in the economy was widely recognized and accepted. With the participation of economists, Keynesian economics established the basis of the post-World War II world pattern. In the 1960s, the idea of free market economy began to rise, and the free market school of thought represented by Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman became the mainstream economic thought that influenced the West and even the world.
Are economists really such heroes as often being portrayed? The reality may be quite different. Apart from a few celebrity economists, economists are essentially a research profession, forming a research community.
In 1973, Swedish economist Axel Leijonhufvud published a comical allegorical essay Life among the Econ, which likened groups of economists, i.e., the Econ", to primitive tribes. The essay pointed out that not only does the Econ tribe have certain circles and strict hierarchies, but one prominent defining feature is its obsession with models. Models have become "totems" of the Econ tribe, and the more ornate and ritualistic the models used by economists, the higher their status within the Econ, even if their models had no obvious practical use. Leijonhufvud described three characteristics of the "model totem worship" of the Econ: high-status drive; status can only be obtained by establishing models; most of the models established seem to have no practical use. These characteristics are similar to the backward "caste system" in some countries.
In the article Model Totem Worship of the Econ Tribe and the Poverty of Economics, Song Xiaochuan stated that the above characteristics exposed the poverty and backwardness of the Econ tribal culture. Economists have been said to despise the "sociological tribe" and the "political tribe" because they do not establish models. Ironically, mathematical economics ranks above microeconomics and macroeconomics in the caste hierarchy of the Econ tribe, with development economics at the bottom of the hierarchy. This is not only because the models used in development economics are not rigorous and complex enough, but also the alleged collusion of development economics with other tribes such as the "sociological tribe" and the "political tribe". Such collusion jeopardizes the "moral fiber" of the tribe and is a suspicion of an attempt to abandon model-making as the basis for the survival of the Econ tribe.
Leijonhufvud's vivid description and satire of the "caste system" of the Econ tribe, the "totem worship" of its precepts and models, is as apt today as ever, almost half a century later. Chinese economist He Fan once cited the statistics of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation that there are about 130,000 economists in the United States. This includes many who work in the corporate and claim to be economists. Among them, there are 60,000 economists with master's degrees and 17,500 economists with doctoral degrees in economics. There are only about 2,000 to 3,000 economists who are really active in academia, of whom about 500 to 600 are "core" economists at the forefront of research, while the remaining 2,000 "peripheral" economists are students, assistants, and admirers of the "core" economists, whose job is to spread, develop and defend the ideas of the "core" economists. To put it simply, the Econ tribe refers to a small number of elite economists from the core and peripheral economists at different levels. Most of them are "admirers" of economists, and their job is to disseminate and repeat the ideas and views of the core economists.
Marion Fourcade, professor of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley, described in her article The Superiority of Economists the rigid hierarchical structure formed by the top-down strict control and management in the field of economics, including the strict control and management of economic journals and organizations, as well as the non-democratic and unfair election procedures. In his article The Trouble With Macroeconomics, Paul Romer, one of the winners of the 2018 Nobel Prize in economics, compared mainstream macroeconomists with string theorists in particle physics and found seven striking similarities between them, namely, a remarkable sense of self-confidence, an unusually uniform community, a group identity akin to religious beliefs or political programs, a strong sense of boundaries between their own group and experts from other groups, a disregard and indifference to the ideas, opinions, and work of experts outside their own group, a tendency to interpret evidence optimistically, to believe exaggerated or incomplete statements of results, and to disregard the possibility of theoretical error, and a lack of identification of the degree and scope of risk involved in research projects. These similarities, Romer argues, show that the development of string theory and post-real macroeconomics manifests itself as a pattern of widespread failure in scientific fields that rely on mathematical theory.
Some lament that economics was a relatively open discipline in the days of Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and it has now become a "tribe" that is closed to the outside world and has strict internal discipline. The Econ tribe seems to be similar to the "scientific community" in the field of natural science. However, due to the lack of clear standards and falsifiability similar to those in natural science, the model worship and strict hierarchy within the Econ tribe have formed a system similar to the "caste system", which is also an important reason why some people criticize the Econ tribe for being poor and backward.
The participation of economists in economic policymaking is an extension of the practice of academic ideas, but strictly speaking, it is also a crossover from the field of economic research into the field of public policy. However, not every economist involved in policy has this objective self-perception. At least in today's Chinese society, there are plenty of economists who think they can rule the roosts. There was once a senior economist who participated in high-level economic decision-making "warned" his juniors: "Don't assume that you are more intelligent and know more about economic policy than policy makers. What economists know is only a small part of the larger, complex system in the country". Economists with such a clear understanding would also have a better understanding of public policy.
As a think tank scholar who has been engaging in public policy research for nearly three decades, Chan Kung, founder of ANBOUND, once pointed out the limitations of model research and model application. The important role and value of the model lie in the concise and accurate explanation of certain phenomena, or it can be used to predict the future. However, the construction of models often requires assumptions and simplification, while public policy research in the real world often has realistic complexity, which is completely different from model worship. Model worship may be easier to form as a paradigm for academic, ivory tower research. But model worship can be a toxic paradigm for think tank research aimed at public policy. Different institutions, research objects, and research objectives will have different research paradigms.
From public policy perspective, what kind of economic research would be considered good research? Chan Kung believes that economic research with simple models, in-depth interpretation, statistical basis, correct policy suggestions, and testable results would be good research, which is also the general understanding of economics for think tank scholars. This understanding differs from the common definition, as it is based on the experience of decades of professional think tank research work.
Final analysis conclusion:
The economist's description of the Econ tribe is a kind of sober self-reflection. Economic research is one of the foundations of public policy, but it is still very different from economic policy work, which is also part of public policy, and should not be confused with it, let alone replacing public policy research with economics research.
