A Comment on George DeMartino's “Professional Economic Ethics: The Posnerian and Naïve Perspectives”

The DeMartino (2013) paper provides a provocative and informative review of the key aspects of the ethical problems faced by applied economists. The purpose of this Comment is not to challenge the contrasts drawn by the author between the two ethics perspectives. Rather, it is our intent to examine more closely the ethical issues that forensic economists may potentially encounter, as identified by the author. DeMartino's paper is rather ambiguous with respect to forensic economic ethics. On the one hand, the paper states that the pressures upon forensic economists are more powerful than those faced by other applied economists; yet, the paper identifies some reasons explaining why there are mechanisms that reduce such pressures.This Comment argues that the author has already identified the broad parameters that explain why ethical problems are less severe for practicing forensic economists. This Comment also expands upon the reasons for this more favorable situation. As a result, the author's conclusion that economics “today is a rogue profession” is excessively broad for two reasons: (1) the focus of the paper is on applied economics, not the entire economics profession, and (2) the phrase would more accurately be stated as: some but not all applied economics comprise a rogue profession.