Economic evolution and uncertainty: Transitions and structural changes

Silvia London; Fernando Tohmé

doi:10.3934/jdg.2019011

Article Contents

2019, Volume 6, Issue 2: 149-158. Doi: 10.3934/jdg.2019011

This issue Previous Article An application of minimal spanning trees and hierarchical trees to the study of Latin American exchange rates Next Article Establishing limits to agriculture and afforestation: A GIS based multi-objective approach to prevent algal blooms in a coastal lagoon

Economic evolution and uncertainty: Transitions and structural changes

Silvia London^1, , and
Fernando Tohmé^2,

1.
IIESS (UNS - Conicet) and Departmento de Economía, Universidad Nacional del Sur, San Andrés 800, Bahía Blanca 8000, Argentina
2.
INMABB (UNS - Conicet) and Departmento de Economía, Universidad Nacional del Sur, Av. Alem 1253, Bahía Blanca 8000, Argentina

^* Corresponding author
^* Corresponding author

Received: December 2018

Revised: March 2019

Published: April 2019

Abstract / Introduction Full Text(HTML) Related Papers Cited by

Abstract

Economic evolution is said to occur when economic structures change. That is, when the institutional and/or technological rules of the society are replaced by new ones. As with evolutionary phenomena in other fields it is rather impossible to predict such changes.

In this paper we present a simple model of evolutionary changes caused by uncertainty about the possible future states of the economy. Agents faced with uncertainty behave in such a way as to either lead the economy to another state or adjust themselves to the newly known environment. In either case, the change involves the modification of one or more fundamental parameters of the economy. Such modification is what we call an evolutionary change.

We prove an impossibility result, stating that there is no way of coordinating those adjustments as to make true any given forecast. Moreover, we show that uncertainty about the future is a real source of novelty.

Keywords:

Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 91B55, 91B99; Secondary: 91B76.

Citation:

Full Text(HTML)

Related Papers

Cited by

References

[1]	N. Bostrom, Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, Oxford University Press, 2014.
[2]	A. Brandenburger, The Language Of Game Theory: Putting Epistemics Into The Mathematics Of Games, World Scientific Publishers, Singapore, 2014. doi: 10.1142/8844.
[3]	A. Clark, Economic Reason: the Interplay of Individual Learning and External Structure, in The Frontiers of the New Institutional Economics (eds. J. Drobak and J. Nye), Academic Press, 1997.
[4]	D. Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, Simon & Schuster, 1995.
[5]	K. Dopfer and J. Potts, The General Theory of Economic Evolution, Routledge, NY, 2007. doi: 10.4324/9780203507407.
[6]	S. Hallegatte, Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change, Global Environmental Change, 19 (2009), 240-247.
[7]	S. London, A methodological note about the analysis of the economic growth and environment, MOJ Ecology & Environmental Science, 2 (2017), 00053. doi: 10.15406/mojes.2017.02.00053.
[8]	S. London and F. Tohmé, A Theoretical Approach to Endogenous Development Traps in an Evolutionary Economic System, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 377 (2015), 255-267. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19704-3_21.
[9]	R. Nelson, Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change, Journal of Economic Literature, 23 (1995), 48-90.
[10]	W. D. Nordhaus, Managing the Global Commons: The Economics of Climate Change, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), 1994.
[11]	D. North, Institutions and economic theory, American Economist, 36 (1992), 3-6.
[12]	R. Pindyck, Climate change policy: What do the models tell us?, Journal of Economic Literature, 51 (2013), 860-872. doi: 10.3386/w19244.
[13]	N. Stern, The economics of climate change, American Economic Review, 98 (2008), 1-37.
[14]	F. Tohmé and S. London, A mathematical representation of economic evolution, Mathematical and Computational Modelling, 27 (1998), 29-40. doi: 10.1016/S0895-7177(98)00042-9.
[15]	S. Vassilakis, Rules for Changing the Rules, Working Paper No. 265, Dept. of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, 1990.