Sheila Dow is Emeritus Professor of Economics at the University of Stirling, Scotland, Adjunct Professor of Economics at the University of Victoria, Canada, and a member of the Academic Council of INET. Her main academic focus is on raising methodological awareness in the fields of macroeconomics, money and banking, and the history of economic thought (especially Hume, Smith and Keynes). While her career has primarily been in academia, she has held positions with the Bank of England and the Government of Manitoba, and as special advisor on monetary policy to the UK Treasury Select Committee. She has held positions such as Chair of INEM and co-editor of Economic Thought and is currently a member of the Academic Advisory Board of the ISRF. Recent books include Foundations for New Economic Thinking (Palgrave Macmillan 2012), and co-edited volumes The General Theory and Keynes for the 21st Century (Edward Elgar, 2018) and Money, Method and Post-Keynesian Economics for the 21st Century (Edward Elgar, 2018).
By this expert
Widespread criticism of elites and their ‘experts ’ raises questions about how economists should perceive their role, and what role societies should give them. We invited four scholars to start an online conversation by sharing their perspectives
As part of our ongoing symposium “Experts on Trial”, Professor Sheila Dow argues that if voters have grown contemptuous of economists’ expertise, that’s because economics has been misrepresented as a technical subject separate from politics and moral judgments
Uncertainty is an unavoidable feature of economic life, although we may cope with it sometimes by ignoring it. Institutions, conventions and behaviour are all conditioned by uncertainty, and they in turn condition uncertainty in a reflexive manner.
The purpose of the paper is to argue for attention to be paid, not only to choice of theory, but also to choice of theoretical approach, in order to address issues posed by the crisis.
Featuring this expert
Some predict global economic catastrophe if Britain votes to leave the EU, others foresee a more limited set of consequences — and some see a telling trend in the public ignoring economists’ warnings
The Institute recently sponsored several panels at the Kiel Global Economic Symposium. In particular, the panel on Income Distribution and Mobility struck us as likely to be of especially wide interest. We are grateful for the participation of all the scholars on them and are pleased to present summaries of their presentations here.
Studies in psychology, neuroscience, biology, and many of the social sciences have long illustrated that human beings react very different from what economics textbooks tell you to expect when they are operating under conditions of radical uncertainty.