Complexity and Economics Research Paper

This sample Complexity and Economics Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Complex systems research is a growing field in economics as well as other social and natural sciences. Complex systems research aims to understand underlying phenomena that regularly occur across various complex systems, whether those systems occur in physics, chemistry, biology, social sciences, or any other discipline. Thus, throughout the field, one finds models and methodologies being shared across disciplines. For instance, one finds statistical mechanics methods from physics applied to the study of infectious diseases in epidemiology. The study of economics from a complex systems or complexity perspective is closely tied to the study of complex systems in general. Defining what is meant by a complex system or complexity can be a difficult task. When one looks up the root word complex in a dictionary, one will read something similar to “made up of complicated interrelated parts” or “involved and intricate.” These definitions give one a start in defining how the word complexity is used in the sciences, but one needs a bit more. A complex system is made of interacting parts (usually many), but those parts do not always need to be complicated. Sometimes, seemingly simple systems produce complex behavior. Further, an understanding of each of the constituent parts individually does not lead to an understanding of the entire system. Thus, complex systems research in economics and elsewhere often constitutes a holistic approach to understanding economic systems. It encompasses understanding not only how individual constituent parts (such as individuals or firms) operate or behave but also how those operations or behaviors aggregate to create a system (such as a market outcome or dynamic time series). What Makes a System Complex? There are several common features of systems that are associated with complex behavior. These are diversity, structured interactions, bounded rationality, adaption and learning, dynamic systems, and lack of centralized authority. These features are inherently associated with many of the systems that economists often study. It is not the case that all complex systems contain all of the elements listed above, but most contain several of these features. In the next section, this research paper describes these common features of a complex system and gives relevant examples from economics. Diversity or Heterogeneity Complex systems frequently are composed of diverse or heterogeneous elements. Elements of a system may be diverse simply because they perform different functions in systems, individuals, firms, and governments, for example. But even agents or objects within a given group or class in a complex system tend to behave, learn, or organize in a multitude of ways. In economics, at the lowest level, the constituent parts are individuals. Individuals in economic systems differ in so many ways […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Experimental Economics Research Paper

This sample Experimental Economics Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Being able to test theories and understand the underlying mechanism behind observed phenomena is crucial for scientific progress in any discipline. Experimentation is an important method of measurement in the natural sciences as well as in social sciences such as psychology, but the use of experiments for gathering economic data is a much more recent endeavor. Economics has long been regarded as a nonexperimental science, which has to rely on observations of economic behavior that occur naturally. Experiments, however, have found their way into the economist’s toolkit in the past few decades and are now being employed commonly in main-stream economics research in many diverse subfields such as game theory, industrial organization, labor and development economics, and, more recently, macroeconomics. The very first experiment in economics is known to have been conducted by Bernoulli on the St. Petersburg’s paradox in 1738 (see Kagel & Roth, 1995, for more on the history of experimental economics). However, more formal experimentation started in the 1930s with individual choice experiments and flourished especially with the advent of game theory with the work of von Neumann and Morgenstern (1944) on the theory of decision making and games. Also around that time, the first “market experiments” were run by Chamberlin (1948) to test competitive equilibrium. Gradually, experiments started being used more and more widely in many areas of economics, and the number of experimental research papers published in economics journals has been growing rapidly and is now on par with more “classical” fields such as economic theory. The development of experimental economics as a field has also been parallel to advances in the field of “behavioral economics.” Behavioral economics aims at integrating insights obtained from psychology into economic models, frequently uses experiments as a method for collecting data and finding out patterns of behavior that are inconsistent with standard theory, and builds new models that can explain the observed behavior in experiments. The most evident recognition of the importance of experimental and behavioral economics was the 2002 Nobel Prize in economics, which was awarded to Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith for their contributions to behavioral and experimental economics, respectively. But why and when do economists need experiments? One of the main goals of empirical analysis in economics is to understand how different models of economic decision making fare in understanding observed economic behavior and outcomes and therefore test the predictive success of economic theories. However, it is not always possible to conduct proper tests of theories or to measure the effects of different economic policies using naturally occurring data because of at least three reasons. First, naturally occurring data may simply not exist. For example, in […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Behavioral Economics Research Paper

This sample Behavioral Economics Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Behavioral economics is the subfield of economics .that borrows from psychology, empirically tests assumptions used elsewhere in economics, and provides theories that aim to be more realistic and closely tied to experimental and field data. In a frequently cited survey article, Rabin (1998) describes behavioral economics as “psychology and economics,” which is a frequently used synonym for behavioral economics. Similarly, Camerer (1999) defines behavioral economics as a research program aimed at reunifying psychology and economics. Definitions and Naming Problems Reunification is a relevant description because of the rather tumultuous relationship between psychology and economics in the arc of economic history. A number of preeminent founders of important schools of economic thought, including Adam Smith, wrote extensively on psychological dimensions of human experience and economic behavior, while later economists sometimes sought explicitly to exclude psychology from economic analysis. For example, Slutsky (1915/1952), whose famous equation is taught to nearly all upper-level microeconomics students, sought to erect a boundary excluding psychology from economics: “If we wish to place economic science upon a solid basis, we must make it completely independent of psychological assumptions” (p. 27). Although historical accounts vary, one standard narrative holds that in the twentieth century, neoclassical economists made an intentional break with psychology in contrast to earlier classical and institutional economists who actively integrated psychology into their writings on economics (e.g., Bruni & Sugden, 2007). In twentieth-century economics’ break with psychology, one especially important source is Milton Friedman’s (1953) essay. In it, Friedman argues that unrealistic or even obviously untrue assumptions—especially, the core assumption used throughout much of contemporary economics (including much of behavioral economics) that all behavior can be modeled as resulting from decision makers solving constrained optimization problems—are perfectly legitimate, so long as they produce accurate predictions. Friedman put forth the analogy of a billiards player selecting shots “as if” he or she were solving a set of equations describing the paths of billiards balls based on Newtonian physics. We know that most expert billiards players have not studied academic physics and therefore do not in fact solve a set of equations each time they set up a shot. Nevertheless, Friedman argues that this model based on manifestly wrong assumptions should be judged strictly in terms of the predictions it makes and not the realism of its assumptions. In contrast to Friedman’s professed lack of interest in investigating the realism of assumptions, behavioral economists have made it a core theme in their work to empirically test assumptions in economic models and modify theory according to the results they observe. Despite this difference with neoclassical economists such as Friedman, behavioral economists frequently use as-if arguments to defend behavioral […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Latin America’s Trade Performance Research Paper

This sample Latin America’s Trade Performance Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Latin America has witnessed impressive economic growth since 2003. The average annual growth of the gross domestic product (GDP) for Latin America has been 5% for the 2003-2007 period, the highest in three decades. Trade performance has been one of the essential factors in explaining this growth. The purpose of this article is to analyze the main elements of Latin America’s trade performance from the 1990s until recent years and to explain whether global demand and economic reforms of the 1990s helped strengthen the role of the region’s trade sector. Latin American countries have had both a positive and negative relationship with the global economy. After their independence around the beginning of the nineteenth century, most of them were involved in the first period of globalization. During this first era of globalization, Latin America based its economic growth on trade of basic commodities with Europe (for some countries, exports represented more than 60% of GDP). With World War I and the Great Depression, international prices of commodities fell, affecting the Latin American countries. An inward-looking economic model known as import substitution industrialization (ISI) was pursued to eliminate industry’s growing dependence on imports and the negative impacts of external shocks from the global economy. Although ISI was crucial in the construction of a manufacturing industry for countries such as Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina, there were also inconsistencies in industrial and trade policies. In the end, this had consequences for the whole economy. After three decades of ISI, it was clear for Latin American governments that it was not possible to uphold an industry based on a growing demand for imported inputs relying on foreign debt. Throughout the 1970s, Latin America obtained low-interest loans. However, after the oil crisis in 1973 and the economic depression through those years, real interest rates increased. As a consequence, Latin American countries entered into a decade of debt crisis. The period 1980-1989 is known as the lost decade because of Latin America’s poor economic performance, increase in poverty, and lack of viable solutions. Latin American countries began a process of trade liberalization after several stabilization programs. The positive numbers in the trade account (exports minus imports) during the first years of the twenty-first century were the result of two factors. The first was the economic reforms whereby exports were again the growth engine during the 1990s. The second factor was the fact that the positive global economic conditions enhanced commodity prices, which made Latin America again dependent on the volatilities of the foreign market. This second era of globalization set new challenges for Latin America. The current global economic conditions with the financial crisis […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Microfinance Research Paper

This sample Microfinance Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Over the past several decades, microfinance, broadly defined as financial services to poor and low-income clients, has become an increasingly important tool for governments, multilateral agencies, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to address poverty. Initially, for example, with Banco Sol in Bolivia, the Grameen Bank of Bangladesh, and Bank Rakyat of Indonesia, microfinance was focused primarily on microcredit, small loans to poor people. The basic idea was to extend credit to poor people who do not have access to finance, enabling them to help themselves. In designing products for the poor, the industry has made substantial innovations in the practices used in lending. In addition, some microfinance institutions (MFIs) now offer a range of financial services, including savings vehicles, money transfers, and insurance specifically designed to meet both the needs and specific situations of poor people. Broad recognition of microfinance as a development strategy came with the United Nations (UN) declaring 2005 The International Year of Microcredit and with the awarding of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize jointly to Mohamed Yunus and to the Grameen Bank, which he founded. In this research paper, we examine some of the economic questions associated with microfinance, particularly credit.1 At the most basic level is the question of why the poor have not had access to finance in the past. A surprising outcome of the “microfinance revolution,” as it was referred to by Marguerite Robinson (2001), is evidence that poor people, despite their impoverished situation, are good credit risks. Poor people borrowing small amounts of money almost always repay their loans, including sometimes fairly steep interest charges, and do it on time. This suggests that they find productive uses for the funds (“Economics Focus,” 2009). But if they are good credit risks, why haven’t banks been operating in this sector in the past—that is, what is the market failure? To answer this, we look at how banks function as a response to problems of asymmetric information. Over the past several centuries, banks have developed a number of common practices to address these problems, such as the use of collateral, restrictive covenants in binding loan contracts, credit registries, and so on. However, many of them are not applicable to poor people. The innovative practices developed by microfinance institutions serve as alternative, innovative responses to this same problem. Some Brief General Statistics Before looking directly at the economic questions of microfinance, it is helpful to look at some statistics from the industry. There has been substantial and sustained growth in the microfinance industry. Between 1997 and 2005, the number of microfinance institutions increased from 618 to 3,133. The number of borrowers increased from 13.5 million to 113.3 million, […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Media Economics Research Paper

This sample Media Economics Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on any topic at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Media economics combines the study of media with economics. The term media is usually interpreted broadly and includes sectors such as television or radio broadcasting plus newspaper, magazine, or online publishing; communications infrastructure provision; and also production of digital and other forms of media content. Media economics is concerned with unravelling the various forces that direct and constrain choices made by producers and suppliers of media. It is an area of scholarship that has expanded and flourished in departments of economics, business, and media studies over the past two decades. A number of reasons explain why media economics has advanced quite significantly in popularity and status over recent years. The increasing relevance of economics has been underlined by the so-called digital revolution and its effect in reshaping media businesses while, at the same time, accelerating related processes of convergence and globalization. Deregulation of national media industries is another major trend that has shifted attention on the part of media policy makers and also academics from political toward economic issues and questions. So although media economics—the application of economics theories and concepts to all aspects of media—is still at a relatively early stage of development as a subject area, its importance for industry, policy makers, and scholars is increasingly apparent. The earliest studies of economics of mass media can be traced back to the 1950s, and these looked at competition among newspapers in the United States. Competition and concentrations of ownership are still key and constant themes within media economics, notwithstanding the many shifts and changes that have redrawn the competitive landscape over time. Other early work that marked out economics of media as being a distinctive field includes studies of competitive programming strategies (i.e., of the different program content strategies used by competing broadcasters). Some landmark studies in media economics owe their existence to the needs of policy makers who have asked for work on, for example, competitive conditions within specific sectors of industry or questions around market access or issues such as spectrum pricing. A very good example is the Peacock (1986) report, commissioned by the U.K. government ahead of the 1990 Broadcasting Act. As the first systematic economic assessment of the U.K. television industry, this report was to have seminal influence over subsequent broadcasting policy in Britain. More recently, a wave of interest, initially sparked by Richard Florida’s (2002) work on urban economics, has fuelled demand for work by economists on “creative industries” (which include media content production). Studies in this area (see, e.g., Hutton, O’Keefe, Schneider, Andari, & Bakhshi, 2007) are frequently concerned with the capacity for creative industries to drive forward growth in the wider economy. […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •