IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecr/col070/11207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consensus and dissension among Mexican economists

Author

Listed:
  • Urzúa, Carlos M.

Abstract

This article identifies areas of agreement and disagreement among Mexican economists in relation to key issues of economics, on the basis of a survey of 360 members of the profession. The propositions eliciting the greatest consensus included: equity in income distribution, vigorous use of antitrust and consumer protection laws and the use of countercyclical fiscal policies. The most contentious issues were: private investment in the energy sector, the determinants of inflation, the minimum wage as a cause of unemployment and the objectives to be pursued by an independent central bank.

Suggested Citation

  • Urzúa, Carlos M., 2007. "Consensus and dissension among Mexican economists," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecr:col070:11207
    Note: Includes bibliography
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/11207
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kearl, J R, et al, 1979. "A Confusion of Economists?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 28-37, May.
    2. Ricketts, Martin & Shoesmith, Edward, 1992. "British Economic Opinion: Positive Science or Normative Judgment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 210-215, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & Tatiana Pérez, 2024. "Gender Differences in Opinions about Market Solutions and Government Interventions: The Case Of Uruguayan Economists," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 211-243, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klein, Daniel B. & Stern, Charlotta, 2005. "Narrow-Tent Democrats and Fringe Others: The Policy Views of Social Science Professors," Working Paper Series 8/2005, Stockholm University, Swedish Institute for Social Research.
    2. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    3. Timothy C. Haab & John C. Whitehead, 2017. "What do Environmental and Resource Economists Think? Results from a Survey of AERE Members," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 43-58.
    4. Niclas Berggren & Henrik Jordahl & Charlotta Stern, 2009. "The Political Opinions of Swedish Social Scientists," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 75-88, Autumn.
    5. Lucey, Brian M. & Delaney, Liam, 2007. "A psychological, attitudinal and professional profile of Irish economists," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 841-855, December.
    6. Daniel B. Klein & Charlotta Stern, 2007. "Is There a Free‐Market Economist in the House? The Policy Views of American Economic Association Members," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 309-334, April.
    7. Mark A. Wynne, 2006. "The Control of Money," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 22(Fall 2006), pages 53-83.
    8. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    9. Roger Gordon & Gordon B. Dahl, 2013. "Views among Economists: Professional Consensus or Point-Counterpoint?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 629-635, May.
    10. Bret Sikkink, 2019. "Socratic Seminars in the Economics Classroom," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 4(2), pages 76-92, December.
    11. S. P. Chakravarty & D. D. Thomakos & K. I. Nikolopoulos, 2016. "Growth, deregulation and rent seeking in post-war British economy," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(18), pages 1719-1729, April.
    12. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Markus Schaffner & Benno Torgler & Stephen Whyte, 2016. "External Influence as an Indicator of Scholarly Importance," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(1), pages 170-195.
    13. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2008. "The Dracula effect: voter information and trade policy," Economics Working Papers 1296, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Oct 2020.
    14. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    15. Bruno Frey, 1985. "State and prospect of public choice: A European view," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 141-161, January.
    16. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Kène Henkens, 2012. "What is on a Demographer’s Mind?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 26(16), pages 363-408.
    17. Rulon D. Pope & Arne Hallam, 1986. "A Confusion of Agricultural Economists?—A Professional Interest Survey and Essay," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(3), pages 572-594.
    18. Slemrod, Joel, 1995. "Professional Opinions About Tax Policy: 1994 and 1934," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 48(1), pages 121-147, March.
    19. Chris Doucouliagos & T.D. Stanley, 2013. "Are All Economic Facts Greatly Exaggerated? Theory Competition And Selectivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 316-339, April.
    20. Daniel B. Klein & Stewart Dompe, 2007. "Reasons for Supporting the Minimum Wage: Asking Signatories of the "Raise the Minimum Wage" Statement," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(1), pages 125-167, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecr:col070:11207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Biblioteca CEPAL (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eclaccl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.