Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- PART ONE CLASSIC DISCUSSIONS
- PART TWO POSITIVIST AND POPPERIAN VIEWS
- PART THREE IDEOLOGY AND NORMATIVE ECONOMICS
- PART FOUR BRANCHES AND SCHOOLS OF ECONOMICS AND THEIR METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
- 16 Econometrics as Observation: The Lucas Critique and the Nature of Econometric Inference
- 17 Does Macroeconomics Need Microfoundations?
- 18 Economics in the Laboratory
- 19 Neuroeconomics: Using Neuroscience to Make Economic Predictions
- 20 The Market as a Creative Process
- 21 What Is the Essence of Institutional Economics?
- PART FIVE NEW DIRECTIONS IN ECONOMIC METHODOLOGY
- Selected Bibliography of Books on Economic Methodology
- Index
- References
16 - Econometrics as Observation: The Lucas Critique and the Nature of Econometric Inference
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- PART ONE CLASSIC DISCUSSIONS
- PART TWO POSITIVIST AND POPPERIAN VIEWS
- PART THREE IDEOLOGY AND NORMATIVE ECONOMICS
- PART FOUR BRANCHES AND SCHOOLS OF ECONOMICS AND THEIR METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
- 16 Econometrics as Observation: The Lucas Critique and the Nature of Econometric Inference
- 17 Does Macroeconomics Need Microfoundations?
- 18 Economics in the Laboratory
- 19 Neuroeconomics: Using Neuroscience to Make Economic Predictions
- 20 The Market as a Creative Process
- 21 What Is the Essence of Institutional Economics?
- PART FIVE NEW DIRECTIONS IN ECONOMIC METHODOLOGY
- Selected Bibliography of Books on Economic Methodology
- Index
- References
Summary
Kevin Hoover (1955–) received a D.Phil. in economics from Oxford University after an undergraduate major in philosophy, and his work reflects this dual competence. He has contributed both to contemporary economics (especially macroeconomics) and to economic methodology, serving for a decade as the editor of The Journal of Economic Methodology. After more than two decades at the University of California, Davis, Hoover is now a professor of economics and a professor of philosophy at Duke University.
The Lucas Critique
Perhaps the principal challenge to the use of econometric models in economic analysis is the policy non-invariance argument, popularly known as the ‘Lucas critique’. Robert Lucas (1976) attacks the use of econometric models as bases for the evaluation of policy on the grounds that the estimated equations of such models are unlikely to remain invariant to the very changes in policy that the economist seeks to evaluate. The argument is originally cast as an implication of rational expectations. Among the constraints people face are the policy rules of the government. If people are rational, then, when these rules change, and if the change is correctly perceived, they take proper account of the change in adjusting their behavior. The rational expectations hypothesis implies that changes in policy will in fact be correctly perceived up to a serially uncorrelated error.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Philosophy of EconomicsAn Anthology, pp. 297 - 314Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
, and (1980a) ‘On the causation of inflation’, Manchester School 48 (2): 140–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1980b) ‘On the causation of inflation: some further clarifications’, Manchester School 49 (4): 355–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1980) ‘The macroeconomics of Dr. Pangloss: a critical survey of the new classical macroeconomics’, Economic Journal 90 (357), 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1985) ‘Atheoretical macroeconometrics: a critique’, Journal of Monetary Economics 16 (3): 283–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, Neil R. and Hendry, David F. (1984) ‘Conditional econometric modelling: an application to new house prices in the United Kingdom’, unpublished typescript, Nuffield College, 31 August.
and (1947) ‘Steps towards a constructive nominalism’, Journal of Symbolic Logic 12 (4): 105–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1980) ‘Testing for causality: a personal viewpoint’, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 2 (4): 329–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1944) ‘The probability approach in econometrics’, Econometrica 12 (supplement, July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1986) ‘Monetarist and antimonetarist causality’, Research in the History of Thought and Methodology 4: 109–26.Google Scholar
(1983) ‘Econometric modelling: the “consumption function” in retrospect’, Scottish Journal of Political Economy 30 (3): 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1982) ‘On the formulation of empirical models in dynamic econometrics’, Annals of Applied Econometrics, 1982–3 (supplement to the Journal of Econometrics on Model Specification), Halbert White (ed.) 20: 3–33.Google Scholar
(1988) The New Classical Macroeconomics: A Sceptical Inquiry, Oxford; Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1990) ‘The logic of causal inference’, Economics and Philosophy 6 (2): 207–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Journal of Econometrics (1988) ‘Causality’ Annals 1982–3 (supplement), Dennis J. Aigner and Arnold Zellner (eds), vol. 39.
(1947) ‘Measurement without theory’, Review of Economics and Statistics 29 (2): 161–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopmans, Tjalling C. (1950) ‘When is an equation complete for statistical purposes’, in (ed.) Statistical Inference in Dynamic Economic Models, New York: John Wiley; London: Chapman & Hall, pp. 393–409.Google Scholar
(1978) Specification Searches: Ad Hoc Inference with Nonexperimental Data, New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Leamer, Edward E. (1985) ‘Vector autoregressions for causal inference?’, in Karl Brunner and Allan H. Meltzer (eds) Understanding Monetary Regimes, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, vol. 22.
Lucas, Robert E., Jr (1976) ‘Econometric policy evaluations: a critique’, in and (eds) The Phillips Curve and Labor Markets, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, vol. 1. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 19–46.Google Scholar
Lucas, Robert E., Jr and Sargent, Thomas J. (1979) ‘After Keynesian macroeconomies’, reprinted in Lucas and Sargent (1981), pp. 295–320.
and (eds) (1981) Rational Expectations and Econometric Practice, London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
(1980) The Cement of the University: A Study in Causation, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesarovic, Mihajlo D. (1969) ‘Mathematical theory of general systems and some economic problems’, in and (eds) Mathematical Systems and Economics I, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 93–116.Google Scholar
Sargent, Thomas J. (1976) ‘The observational equivalence of natural and unnatural rate theories of macroeconomics’, reprinted in Lucas and Sargent (1981), pp. 553–62.CrossRef
Simon, Herbert A. (1952) ‘On the definition of the causal relation’, reprinted as chapter 3 in H. A. Simon (1957) Models of Man, New York: John Wiley.
Simon, Herbert A. (1953) ‘Causal ordering and identifiability’, reprinted as chapter 1 of Simon (1957), Models of Man, New York: John Wiley.
(1977) ‘Exogeneity and causal ordering in macroeconomic models’, New Methods of Business Cycle Research: Proceedings of a Conference, Minneapolis: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, pp. 23–44.Google Scholar
(1982) ‘Policy analysis with econometric models’, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (1): 107–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. (1983) ‘On the existence of a competitive equilibrium: 1930–1954’, Journal of Economic Literature 21 (1): 1–39.Google Scholar
Zellner, Arnold A. (1979) ‘Causality and econometrics’, and (eds) Three Aspects of Policy Making: Knowledge, Data and Institutions, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series oh Public Policy, vol. 10. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 9–54.Google Scholar