Clinical macroeconomics and differential diagnosis

IF 1.8 2区经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Oxford Review of Economic Policy Pub Date : 2020-12-31 DOI:10.1093/OXREP/GRAA039

J. Sachs

引用次数: 3

Abstract

The 2008 financial crisis laid bare several deficiencies of mainstream macroeconomic analysis, most importantly the failure to engage in systematic differential diagnosis. Mainstream macroeconomics, following Keynes, has unduly privileged aggregate demand shocks in both analysis and policy prescription, whereas actual macroeconomic crises emerge from a much more diverse set of causes: demand, supply, panic, coordination failures, and, of course, even pandemic disease. The systematic application of differential diagnosis of underlying sources of shocks would improve system resilience and policy responses.

查看原文本刊更多论文

临床宏观经济学与鉴别诊断

2008年的金融危机暴露了主流宏观经济分析的几个缺陷，最重要的是未能进行系统的鉴别诊断。继凯恩斯之后，主流宏观经济学在分析和政策制定方面都过度重视总需求冲击，而实际的宏观经济危机则源于一系列更加多样的原因：需求、供应、恐慌、协调失败，当然还有流行病。系统地应用对潜在冲击源的鉴别诊断将提高系统的复原力和政策应对能力。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Oxford Review of Economic Policy ECONOMICS-

CiteScore

12.50

自引率

1.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Oxford Review of Economic Policy is a refereed journal which is published quarterly. Each issue concentrates on a current theme in economic policy, with a balance between macro- and microeconomics, and comprises an assessment and a number of articles. It gives a valuable appraisal of economic policies worldwide. While the analysis is challenging and at the forefront of current thinking, articles are presented in non-technical language to make them readily accessible to all readers. The Oxford Review is aimed at a wide audience including government, business and policy-makers, as well as academics and students. It is required reading for those who need to know where research is leading.