Jump to content

Normative economics: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
clarification needed on door ajar
cn number 3
Line 3: Line 3:
Economists commonly prefer to distinguish normative economics ("what ought to be" in economic matters) from [[positive economics]] ("what is"). Many normative (value) judgments, however, are held conditionally, to be given up if facts or knowledge of facts changes, so that a change of values may be purely scientific.<ref>Stanley Wong (1987). "Positive economics", The ''New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics'', v. 3, p. 21.</ref> On the other hand, welfare economist [[Amartya Sen]] distinguishes ''basic (normative) judgements'', which do not depend on such knowledge, from ''nonbasic'' judgments, which do. He said, "no judgments are demonstrably basic" while some value judgments may be shown to be nonbasic. {{clarification needed| reason=this is an allusive sentiment, rather than a concrete sentiment, as more appropriate on Wikipedia; the door is ajar to what, precisely? |text=This leaves open the possibility of fruitful scientific discussion of value judgments.}}<ref>[[Amartya Sen|Amartya K. Sen]] (1970), ''Collective Choice and Social Welfare'', pp. 61, 63-64).</ref>
Economists commonly prefer to distinguish normative economics ("what ought to be" in economic matters) from [[positive economics]] ("what is"). Many normative (value) judgments, however, are held conditionally, to be given up if facts or knowledge of facts changes, so that a change of values may be purely scientific.<ref>Stanley Wong (1987). "Positive economics", The ''New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics'', v. 3, p. 21.</ref> On the other hand, welfare economist [[Amartya Sen]] distinguishes ''basic (normative) judgements'', which do not depend on such knowledge, from ''nonbasic'' judgments, which do. He said, "no judgments are demonstrably basic" while some value judgments may be shown to be nonbasic. {{clarification needed| reason=this is an allusive sentiment, rather than a concrete sentiment, as more appropriate on Wikipedia; the door is ajar to what, precisely? |text=This leaves open the possibility of fruitful scientific discussion of value judgments.}}<ref>[[Amartya Sen|Amartya K. Sen]] (1970), ''Collective Choice and Social Welfare'', pp. 61, 63-64).</ref>


Positive and normative economics are often synthesized in the style of [[practical idealism]]. In this discipline, sometimes called the "art of economics", positive economics is utilized as a practical tool for achieving normative objectives, which often involve policy changes or states of affairs.
Positive and normative economics are often synthesized in the style of [[practical idealism]]. In this discipline, sometimes called the "art of economics", positive economics is utilized as a practical tool for achieving normative objectives, which often involve policy changes or {{clarification needed| reason=unfathomable to me as common knowledge shared among the majority of readers |text=states of affairs.}}


An example of a normative economic statement is as follows:
An example of a normative economic statement is as follows:

Revision as of 14:48, 30 September 2023

Normative economics (as opposed to positive economics) is the part of economics that deals with normative statements. It focuses on the idea of fairness and what the outcome of the economy or goals of public policy ought to be.[1]

Economists commonly prefer to distinguish normative economics ("what ought to be" in economic matters) from positive economics ("what is"). Many normative (value) judgments, however, are held conditionally, to be given up if facts or knowledge of facts changes, so that a change of values may be purely scientific.[2] On the other hand, welfare economist Amartya Sen distinguishes basic (normative) judgements, which do not depend on such knowledge, from nonbasic judgments, which do. He said, "no judgments are demonstrably basic" while some value judgments may be shown to be nonbasic. This leaves open the possibility of fruitful scientific discussion of value judgments.[clarification needed][3]

Positive and normative economics are often synthesized in the style of practical idealism. In this discipline, sometimes called the "art of economics", positive economics is utilized as a practical tool for achieving normative objectives, which often involve policy changes or states of affairs.[clarification needed]

An example of a normative economic statement is as follows:

The price of milk should be $6 a gallon to give dairy farmers a higher living standard and to save the family farm.

This is a normative statement, because it reflects value judgments. This specific statement makes the judgment that farmers deserve a higher living standard and that family farms ought to be saved.[1]

Normative economics predicates itself upon maximizing both an agents social and political utility, recognized as "aggregating interests".

Subfields of normative economics include social choice theory, cooperative game theory, and mechanism design.

Some earlier technical problems posed in welfare economics and the theory of justice have been sufficiently addressed as to leave room for consideration of proposals[clarification needed] in applied fields such as resource allocation, public policy, social indicators, and inequality and poverty measurement.[4]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b Paul A. Samuelson and William D. Nordhaus (2004). Economics, 18th ed., pp. 5-6 & [end] Glossary of Terms, "Normative vs. positive economics."
  2. ^ Stanley Wong (1987). "Positive economics", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 3, p. 21.
  3. ^ Amartya K. Sen (1970), Collective Choice and Social Welfare, pp. 61, 63-64).
  4. ^ Marc Fleurbaey (2008). "Ethics and economics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Abstract.

References

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Normative_economics&oldid=1177929057"