2004Econ journal watchRequires access

The Development Set: The Character of the Journal of Development Economics 2002

Susan Anderson, Peter J. Boettke

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

We survey the six issues of the Journal of Development Economics that were published in 2002 in an effort to test the proposition that the field of development economics has been transformed by the institutional choice perspective in economics and political economy, and by the accumulating evidence on the failed policies of development assistance. These radical departures from business as usual research in development economics are evident in scholarly books, popular books, and public policy discussions. As we document, however, neither the theoretical perspective of institutional economics nor the empirical record of failed policy have had that significant of an impact on the field of development economics as reflected in the Journal of Development Economics. We find that the research agendas of scholars in the field mirror the research mandates of the leading international agencies and that the mode of argumentation attempts to mimic the professional biases in the economics profession toward formalism, and both of these forces conspire to limit the creativity and engagement with real problems of public policy by the "Development Set."

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We survey the six issues of the Journal of Development Economics that were published in 2002 in an effort to test the proposition that the field of development economics has been transformed by the institutional choice perspective in economics and political economy, and by the accumulating evidence on the failed policies of development assistance. These radical departures from business as usual research in development economics are evident in scholarly books, popular books, and public policy discussions. As we document, however, neither the theoretical perspective of institutional economics nor the empirical record of failed policy have had that significant of an impact on the field of development economics as reflected in the Journal of Development Economics. We find that the research agendas of scholars in the field mirror the research mandates of the leading international agencies and that the mode of argumentation attempts to mimic the professional biases in the economics profession toward formalism, and both of these forces conspire to limit the creativity and engagement with real problems of public policy by the "Development Set."

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We survey the six issues of the Journal of Development Economics that were published in 2002 in an effort to test the proposition that the field of development economics has been transformed by the institutional choice perspective in economics and political economy, and by the accumulating evidence on the failed policies of development assistance. These radical departures from business as usual research in development economics are evident in scholarly books, popular books, and public policy discussions. As we document, however, neither the theoretical perspective of institutional economics nor the empirical record of failed policy have had that significant of an impact on the field of development economics as reflected in the Journal of Development Economics. We find that the research agendas of scholars in the field mirror the research mandates of the leading international agencies and that the mode of argumentation attempts to mimic the professional biases in the economics profession toward formalism, and both of these forces conspire to limit the creativity and engagement with real problems of public policy by the "Development Set."

Key concepts: Positive economics, Human development theory, Argumentation theory, Schools of economic thought, Politics, Public choice, Mainstream economics, Heterodox economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Development Set: The Character of the Journal of Development Economics 2002 — Research Paper | ScholarLens