Was sollen wir tun? Was dürfen wir glauben? - bei DuEPublico ...

546 WÜNDISCH
This assessment carelessly neglects the analysts’ awareness of the weaknesses of their
predictions as well as their ability to take into account the risk aversion of those the analysis is
supposed to guide. Just as climatologists offer confidence intervals for their predictions, any
thoughtful cost-benefit analysis will comment on the contingencies of its predictions and
address uncertainties in any recommendation. To deny this implies that economists are
strangers to analyzing decisions under uncertainty – little is further from the truth. If we use
an imperfect analysis in the knowledge that it is imperfect it can very well help us.
In summary, the basic observation that it is challenging to forecast the development of
economies especially in the face of exogenous shocks is justified and well supported.
However, there are three reasons to be skeptical of the general claim that economic analysis is
practically useless when confronted with the uncertainties brought about by climate change.
First, economic analysis is not only concerned with the development of economies alone but
seeks to take into account all effects a policy change has on welfare. No plausible analysis can
avoid considering these effects and facing the relevant uncertainties. Second, even if
economic analysis was focused on the workings and the development of economies alone, it is
unclear how an ethical theory could avoid taking them into account as long as they are
assumed to impact welfare or any other important policy goal. Third, economic analysis is
well adapted to analyzing decisions under uncertainty and therefore produces normative
recommendations that take into account its exposure to that uncertainty.
6. Conclusion
Many of the common criticisms voiced against economic analysis as a tool within public
policy are either based on misinterpretations about the aims and capabilities of normative
economics or formulated without taking into view the specific practical challenges that arise
in any attempt to make a theory of welfare operational. However, critics are correct to point
out that the criterion of economic efficiency is not of exclusive importance. Given the
dominance of economic analysis within the public policy discourse this may be an important
reminder for some – even if economics as a science says nothing different and most
economists are well aware of that.
One important effect of the critiques raised against economics by moral philosophers is that
they inspire collaboration and bring about theoretical advancements. The work of that kind
best known among philosophers is probably the capabilities approach to well-being
developed by Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen as well as Sen’s application of that
approach to questions of egalitarianism. 23 As long as criticisms like those of Jamieson
encourage further investigation into the important field of the philosophy of economics they
are valuable.
Joachim Wündisch
Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
Joachim.Wuendisch@uni-duesseldorf.de
References
Adler, M. D. and E. A. Posner 2006: New Foundations of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Cambridge,
(MA): Harvard University Press.
23
Sen 1992, Nussbaum and Sen 1993, Sen 1999, as well as Hausman 2008: 31.