Even if non-economists would not believe this, economic papers, theories and decisions unleash ferocious passion among economists, just like religion and politics do among other mortals. And the reason is that all these topics are related to POWER.

Economic policy-makers are powerful: In their hands rest the lives of millions of souls. Their decisions can lead the economy towards growth or depression and inevitably this general macroeconomic situation affects each and every agent. Academics are powerful too, not only because their ideas constitute the framework within which economic policy makers take their decisions, but also on a small scale, influencing the way their students think, and their lives in general.

Someone once told me that people who want to be economists are power-hungry and they only seek recognition… and money. I always try to argue about this, considering it is a misconception. However, sometimes I feel I should bestow. Economics, as any other science, is a tool, and it is, by itself, neutral. But the fact that it is a powerful tool involves a great social responsibility. At the core of these decisions there are always neutral economic rules that help us make policy choices, but I am not sure whether these choices are truly in harmony with any ethical principles.

As a classical example, the concept of economic efficiency in the context of a general equilibrium model, is, as defined by Mas-Collell et al, “an economic outcome […](where) there is not alternative feasible outcome at which every individual in the economy is at least as well off and some individual is strictly better off”. This is when equilibrium has been reached.

This is a pretty neutral, well-known economic statement. However, the theory finds that there is an infinite amount of these economic efficient equilibriums and there is where the theory fails to respond which one is better, leaving some scope for ethics to fill the gap; however not many economists know enough of this topic (myself included) to actually complement this neutral economical knowledge.

Do you sense that the economic profession as a whole lacks an ethical background?