The global push for pluralism in university economic curriculums

A response to the debate sweeping across many social science departments of major universities across the world, the main purpose of this event was to encourage further exploration into alternative forms of economic theory and continue challenging the current orthodox that has historically influenced higher educational economic curricula. It was an extension of conversations that have been taking place in both academic and policy circles since 2008, when the global financial crisis provided a brutal awakening to many that the way in which we think about economics and free markets is sometimes flawed.

To simplify, economics is largely an attempt to explain phenomenon going on in the world through mathematical models, relationships and theories which depend on numerous assumptions, ceteris paribus. For example, if prices rise, the demand for normal goods will fall. If supply rises, prices will fall. Humans are rational agents who always attempt to optimize their allocation of limited resources. Markets are the best mechanisms for facilitating this resource allocation and government intervention is hardly ever a good thing. The list goes on. And yet, the global financial crisis was a clear demonstration of the fallibility of some of these assumptions – they do not always hold in practice and are often significantly disconnected with reality. The free market is not all that its historically been cracked up to be.[1]

Many students working their way through a typical university economics curriculum have questioned the disconnect between some of the economic assumptions we are taught, and the reality that we live. We did not need the financial crisis to point this out. Furthermore, most young economic students aren’t even aware that what they are being taught is a specific school of thought, distinct from the myriad of economic theories that have emerged from a rich and complex global economic history.

Abstract models, mathematical equations and graphs, albeit meant to simply complex phenomena, are undermined by their strict assumptions which fail to represent everything that is going on in the real world.[2] Likewise, the textbooks from which we are taught do not reflect many of the major socio-economic issues challenging society, and you feel no more equipped upon graduation to begin addressing these than you did upon entering tertiary education. Often, you avoid telling people that you studied economics as they begin to pepper you with questions about our world that you have no idea how to answer; and you aren’t quite sure at which stage, if ever, you can consider yourself to be a ‘proper’ economist. History, politics, philosophy, sociology – these are things you know very little about at the end of your studies, yet they are almost inextricably linked to global economic developments.

It was in response to such challenges that student groups all over the world began protesting. One of the first and more prominent groups to do so is the Post-Crash Economics Society, situated at the University of Manchester (this later joined the Rethinking Economics organisation). They were followed by others such as the Cambridge Society for Economic Pluralism, SOAS Open Economics Forum, LSE Post-Crash Economics Society and Essex University Post-Crash Economics Society. Similar organizations began establishing themselves at universities all over the world.

They are all motivated by one common goal – to enrich the debate around mainstream economics through the promotion of a pluralistic teaching approach. They argue that economics should not be taught in isolation from other important social science topics and that all economic students should at some point be exposed to the history of economic thought, so that they can develop an understanding of where and how the various schools of economic thought arose.[3]They want to see the development of curriculums that engage with other types of economics such as Austrian, post-Keynesian, Marxist, Complexity, Feminist and Ecological economics.[4]

The aim is not to replace orthodox economics but to instead present it as one possible way of interpreting economic events in the real world and ensure that students realise there are many other points of view. It is also to ensure that young graduates develop a well-rounded understanding of how the world works. It has always struck me as problematic that many economists graduate without any exposure to the political economy, whilst many political scientists head out into the work force with very little understanding as to how the theories they espouse interact with the economy.

Whilst not everyone is happy with this new push for pluralism – some feeling the movement will throw the baby out with the bathwater and others feeling that it has not gone far enough – on the whole, it is very positive to see so many young economists taking charge of their education and seeking out more holistic, multi-disciplinary solutions to the problems facing society at large. More should be done to ensure that they are equipped with strong communication and data handling skills, are open to inter-disciplinary solutions and are aware of the latest research frontiers being broached.[5]