7/25/2019 Puzzle Modern Economics

1/3

246 Book Review

the countrys rise is a sustainable and positive phenomenon altogether. Moreover,

Hus study of Chinas superpower status makes available a rare glimpse into the

normative underpinnings of the countrys external affairs. It is expected that the

volume would be invaluable for the purposes of teaching and theorizing the ongoing

transformations in global life as a result of Chinas centrality. Hus book would also

be invaluable to policymakers and pundits as it provides a much needed and veritable

interpretation of the past, present, and future trajectories of Beijings external

outlook.

Emilian Kavalski

University Western Sydney (Australia)

Emilian Kavalski is a senior lecturer in Politics and International Relations in the School of Humanities and

Languages.

The Puzzle of Modern Economics: Science or Ideology? by Roger E. Backhouse. New York:

Cambridge University Press, 2010. Paper: ISBN 978-0-521-53261-7, $24.99. 186

pages.

The title is apt, and this is so on multiple levels. First, Roger Backhouse, in the

acknowledgements section of the book, admits that what began as a history of

economics since World War II that would illuminate the present state of the

discipline, became something else because he could not get the pieces to fit as he had

hoped. Over a period of years, he excised many of the original chapters and replaced

them with others that were more methodological than historical. The result is that the

pieces of the puzzle that is this volume often seemed to have been forced-fit. Second,

there is the puzzle of the authors presentation. Backhouse begins by presenting a

series of present day case studies intended to illustrate what happens when economists

apply their learning to actual problems of economic policy. The Introduction and Part

I, entitled Economics in Action, deal with the credit crunch in 2008, the U.S. acid

rain program, the British 3G telecom auction, the Russian transition to capitalism,

and globalization. Part II leaves the present for the recent past, providing Historical

Perspectives. The puzzle here is why Backhouse chose this particular order. The

seemingly more natural approach would have been to state the thesis, provide the

historical and methodological background, then move to the cases. As it is, the shift is

abrupt, and the reader may feel that she is reading two unrelated books. Backhouse

does attempt to stitch the parts together in a concluding chapter entitled Economic

Science and Economic Myth which comprises Part III, headed Evaluation.

Judging by the subtitle, the puzzle to which the title refers is whether

contemporary mainstream economics is science or ideology. The answer, on this third

7/25/2019 Puzzle Modern Economics

2/3

Book Review 247

the policy environment can be changed to conform with the assumptions of the

theory. In more complex policy situations, which would appear to be most of the

time, where economic science fails to consider behavior that does not answer to

rational actor, free market, perfectly competitive frameworks, theory comes up short.

Does this mean that ideology takes over? Not in Backhouses view. The reason for an

unjustified faith in free markets and rational choice models was not ideology but that

the models espoused powerful, rigorous, and apparently scientific methods. No

surprises here, either. Institutionalists long ago concluded that the rational agent, free

market paradigm could not handle the thorny problems and this because of both

ideological and methodological shortcomings. Backhouse gives such heterodox

insights little credit and credibility, comparing them to homeopathy, creation science,

and astrology, and preferring what amounts to the same conclusions belatedly reached

by those working within the received view. A final and ironic level is that Backhouse,

in steering away from an ideology-based reason for the failure of theory in policy

applications, points instead toward the possible explanation that economists have

become abstract puzzle-solvers, which is, after all, what they are taught to be. Why they

continue to be so instructed is the overarching and enduring puzzle of economics.

Roger Ashby

William Peace University

Roger Ashby is an assistant professor in the Business and Political Science departments.

The Myth of Development: Non-Viable Economies and the Crisis of Civilization, by Oswaldo

de Rivero, 2d ed. London: Zed Books, 2010. Paper: ISBN 978-1-84823-584-0, $29.94.

176 pages.

Oswaldo de Riveros second edition of The Myth of Development: Non-Viable Economies

and the Crisis of Civilization includes added material and updated statistics for his case

against development. de Rivero has held positions as a Peruvian diplomat, Perus

permanent representative to the World Trade Organization, and sat on the board of

the UN Security Council. This appears to be de Riveros second book, following New

Economic Order and International Development Law (1980).

In six chapters, de Rivero demonstrates how the idea of development remains

a mythological concept. The author builds on historical references as well as

systematically delineates development polices and outcomes. The book completes its

task.

The author roots his narrative in Thomas Hobbess Leviathan. De Rivero

7/25/2019 Puzzle Modern Economics

3/3

Reproducedwithpermissionof thecopyrightowner. Further reproductionprohibitedwithoutpermission.