Knowledge that Transforms

Editor's Note Our policy is to annotate all English-language books on economics and related subjects that are sent to us. A very small number of foreign-language books are called to our attention and annotated by our consulting editors or others. Our staff does not monitor and order books published; therefore, if an annotation of a book does not appear six months after the publication date, please write to us or the publisher concerning the book.

Editor's Note Our policy is to annotate all English-language books on economics and related subjects that are sent to us. A very small number of foreign-language books are called to our attention and annotated by our consulting editors or others. Our staff does not monitor and order books published; therefore, if an annotation of a book does not appear six months after the publication date, please write to us or the publisher concerning the book.

This essay reviews new histories of the role of game theory and rational decision making in shaping the social sciences, economics among them, in the postwar period. The recent books The World the Game Theorists Made by Paul Erickson and How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind: The Strange Career of Cold War Rationality by Paul Erickson, Judy Klein, Lorraine Daston, Rebecca Lemov, Thomas Sturm, and Michael Gordin raise a number of complex historical questions about the interconnections among game theory, utility theory, decision theory, optimization theory, information theory, and theories of rational choice. Moreover, the contingencies of time, place, and person call into question the usefulness of economists' linear narratives about the autonomous and progressive development of modern economics. The essay finally reflects on the challenges that these issues present for historians of recent economics. (JEL B23, C70, D74, N42)

The potential of Internet-enabled distance learning to transform higher education focuses attention on exactly what residential higher-education institutions do for and to their students. Two recent books marshal detailed quantitative and subjective data on individual student outcomes to document the effects of two institutions and how these outcomes might be improved. Paying for the Party concludes that a Midwestern state university reinforces existing economic inequalities rather than fostering upward mobility. How College Works finds that a northeastern liberal-arts college generally serves its students well and suggests low-cost improvements. These claims are evaluated. (JEL D63, I23, I24)

The list below specifies doctoral degrees conferred by U.S. and Canadian universities during academic year July 2016 to June 2017. Lists of degree recipients and subject classifications are provided by the university. Note: Dissertations without classifications may be found under “Y Miscellaneous Categories.”

Powerful currents have reshaped the structure of families over the last century. There has been (1) a dramatic drop in fertility and greater parental investment in children; (2) a rise in married female labor-force participation; (3) a significant decline in marriage; (4) a higher degree of positive assortative mating; (5) more children living with a single mother; and (6) shifts in social norms governing premarital sex and married women’s roles in the workplace. Macroeconomic models explaining these aggregate trends are surveyed. The relentless flow of technological progress and its role in shaping family life are stressed. (JEL D13, J12, J13, J16, J22, O33, Z13)

This essay discusses the structure and governance of the Federal Reserve System in light of the many changes in its activities over the past thirty years. Based on this analysis, it argues in favor of four specific reforms: clarification of Congressional expectations for the system; enhanced Federal Reserve Board of Governors transparency with respect to its oversight of the Reserve Banks; stripping monetary-policy votes from the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Boards of Directors of the Reserve Banks; and the initiation of a public conversation about redesigning the Federal Reserve as a unified public entity. (JEL D72, E44, E52, E58, G21, G28)

What is law and why do people obey it? This question from jurisprudence has recently been tackled using the tools of economics. The field of law and economics has long studied how fines and imprisonment affect behavior. Nobody believes, however, that all compliance is motivated by penalties, and it is questionable whether that is even the typical motivation. Two books published in 2015, Frederick Schauer's The Force of Law and Richard McAdams's The Expressive Powers of Law: Theories and Limits, consider alternative motivations—Schauer skeptically and McAdams more sympathetically. While coercion, either directly or in support of internalized norms, seems to dominate law qua law (and not as a mere expression of morality), a considerable portion of law serves other uses such as coordination, information provision, expression, and reduction of transaction costs. (JEL C72, D23, D83, K00, K40, Z13)

In his Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity, Joseph Fishkin claims he presents an entirely new way of thinking about equality of opportunity. The core of the new theory is the call for opportunity pluralism, which consists in enlarging the range of opportunities available to people at every stage in life. In this essay, we discuss how successful Fishkin is at shaking the way economists think about equality of opportunity. We identify two aspects of Fishkin's theory that deeply conflict with economic theories of equality of opportunity. Those aspects have to do with the way economists interpret the ethical values of respect for preferences and responsibility. We also argue that the way Fishkin suggests to look at opportunities can help economists fill gaps in the way they define well-being and social justice. (JEL A13, D63, I31).

Stephen S. Cohen and J. Bradford DeLong view US economic policy extending up to 1980 as pragmatically fostering growth. This they interpret as the Hamiltonian tradition, and their intent is to rescue policy debate from the data- and logic-free quagmire into which they believe it has fallen. Following an introduction, section 2 of this essay describes methods and evidence that permit statements about the historical influence of ideological thinking more empirically grounded than those essayed by the authors. Section 3 examines specific aspects of their narrative. Section 4 considers what we mean by ideological thinking, and why it might be deleterious. (JEL D72, E61, L52, N41, N42)