日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細


公開

学術論文

Microeconomic Forecasting: Constructing Commensurable Futures of Educational Reforms

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons191825

Dix,  Guus
Soziologie des Marktes, MPI for the Study of Societies, Max Planck Society;
Center for Science and Technology Studies, Science and Evaluation Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands;

External Resource
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
フルテキスト (公開)

SSS_49_2019_Dix.pdf
(全文テキスト(全般)), 306KB

付随資料 (公開)
There is no public supplementary material available
引用

Dix, G. (2019). Microeconomic Forecasting: Constructing Commensurable Futures of Educational Reforms. Social Studies of Science, 49(2), 180-207. doi:10.1177/0306312719837364.


引用: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0003-3B77-6
要旨
According to economists from the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, the introduction of performance pay for primary and secondary school teachers would lead to an increase in Dutch GDP of one-and-a-half percent in 2070. A new epistemic practice of microeconomic forecasting undergirded this attempt to make the distant future part of the political present. Taking the construction of the economic growth potential of performance pay as a starting point, this article analyzes how microeconomic forecasting emerged in one of the world’s oldest forecasting bureaus – and to what consequences. First, it highlights the institutional preconditions for this ‘turn to micro’ in an institution that had pioneered in the field of macroeconomic forecasting. Second, the article analyzes microeconomic forecasting as a distinct epistemic practice that brings different forms of economic expertise together to make the future of educational reforms commensurable. Finally, it analyzes the political consequences of this new epistemic practice in the sense that it not only enables but simultaneously limits the provision of policy-relevant evidence. Beyond the specificities of the case, the article contributes to the sociological study of economic policy devices against the background of a predominant market bias in the STS research on economics.