Economics department needs reform
Thomas A. Gresik
professor of finance and business economics
As news of the proposal to divide the current economics department into two new departments has become public, genuine concerns from students are being expressed. Because the current problems the University seeks to rectify have persisted for many years, it is understandably difficult for students and most faculty to be aware of all the specific issues and past attempted solutions.
At its core, the fundamental problems have been the long-standing and openly hostile treatment of economists whose teaching and research has been well-received by mainstream economists and the continuing attempt to portray mainstream economists as lacking the proper interest, perspectives, philosophies and techniques to address the important social justice issues the University consistently expresses the resolve to tackle.
The first problem is more than simply unfortunate because the practice has denied many classes of undergraduates an accurate and honest presentation of the strengths and weaknesses both of what many call "neoclassical economics" and "heterodox economics." Rather than supporting and objectively presenting diverse points of view in and out of the classroom, the tradition of the economics department has instead been to vilify those who have attempted to apply well-vetted mainstream techniques to the economic problems so important to all of us.
The second problem of portraying mainstream economists as uninterested or undedicated to problems of social justice is equally disturbing because it is blatantly false. Take a look, for instance, at the most prestigious economics journal, The American Economic Review. In 2002 issues alone, you will find sophisticated analyses of racial profiling, worldwide income inequality, childhood health, private schooling vouchers, disability programs, the Head Start program and the electricity crisis in California. Look more broadly and you will find papers focusing on the effects of international trade agreements, minimum wage laws, and monetary conduct and policy as well as on incentive contracting and imperfect competition among businesses.
All of these are issues that speak directly to the human condition, especially in our modern, globally interconnected society. These are also very complex issues that require sophisticated theories and empirical methods to help us distinguish policies that only superficially address symptoms from policies that truly have a chance to improve social conditions.
What then should the University do to improve the quality of the economics scholarship and curriculum? Perhaps extra faculty lines and resources would help. It's been done. Until Professor Jensen was hired as department chair, the department was unable to recruit high quality candidates.
Perhaps the faculty in the department can be encouraged to work together. Tried that too. The faculty who created and perpetuated the above problems have refused to cooperate. Not only that, but the department's external reputation among mainstream economists is very poor. There are a number of very prominent economists who have expressed a keen interest in coming to Notre Dame (including some Domers) and yet will not consider an offer as long as the unproductive and nasty politicization of the department, created many years ago, continues.
But why should students care? What if many students like the economic training currently available? These questions deserve two responses.
First, the beauty of the current proposal is that it allows both groups of economists to credibly co-exist. There is nothing in the current proposal that precludes both departments from offering courses that would count towards an economics major. Students like Noah Amstadter are fortunate to have the opportunity to take the sort of classes Professor Warlick teaches. At Notre Dame, students should be equally fortunate to have the opportunity to take insightful courses from prominent mainstream economists as well.
My second response begins with a question. What attracted you to Notre Dame? The most recent U.S. News and World Report review of universities ranks Notre Dame 18th. My guess is that for many students this and similar rankings provide a signal of both the quality of instruction and the prestige of holding a Notre Dame degree. Indeed, it is an indication of the educational opportunities available to undergraduate and graduate students during their years of study and of the future opportunities a Notre Dame degree creates after graduation.
The National Research Council (NRC) ranks departments in many disciplines every ten years. In 1993, the economics department ranking was 81 out of 108. Numerous other rankings convey a similar message. For a university with the reputation and aspirations of Notre Dame, the Department of Economics is an embarrassment and efforts by a few to improve the department have been rebuffed by the majority. So what attracted you to Notre Dame: 18 or 81?
Thomas A. Gresik
professor of finance and business economics
Feb. 10
All Viewpoint Stories for Tuesday, February 11, 2003
