[okfn-discuss] why data and process in academic publishing matters

[Marc Joffe]

Tony/Velichka

 

Thanks for your thoughtful comments and thanks to Velichka for the
informative blog post.  I was not even aware that AEA had a policy on open
data.

 

Tony:  I think you would have to admit that the implication of your argument
is that no empirical economics study actually impacts policy.  Surely, if
the Reinhart/Rogoff study didn't, which other less influential studies did?
If everyone has an unalterable a priori position and just cherry picks data
from studies to support their preconceived notions, then it is hard to see
the value of conducting empirical research.  The fact is you may be right,
but I hope you are wrong (since that means that a lot of us are wasting our
time collecting and analyzing economic data).  It would be interesting to
see some experimental research on this question.

 

Velichka:  My point is that if researchers get "slapped down" for releasing
their data when it contains mistakes, they will be more reluctant to do so
in the future.  After all, even economists respond to incentives.  With
respect to your post, I agree with your view that they should have publicly
released the data.  I may have added kudos to R&R for releasing their
original data set (from "This Time Is Different") which was most helpful to
me in my own research.

 

Cheers,

Marc

 

From: okfn-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org
[mailto:okfn-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of Velichka Dimitrova
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 1:53 AM
To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list
Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] why data and process in academic publishing
matters

 

With regard to changing policy, it might be then "a coincidence" that
Lagarde told Osborne
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/18/george-osborne-imf-austerity
>  in the same week that UK needs to re-think austerity. These are a few
politicians from EU and the US who had taken the 90% threshold level as a
benchmark in their policy.

 

The reason why the Reinhart and Rogoff case made so much news is that the
issue they have researched is so close to peoples' hearts. Austerity and
public sector cuts affect directly many people.

 

Economic studies get replicated and disproved very often, yet the this
particular one does is an issue that all people can relate to.

 

I wouldn't necessarily conclude however as Marc has suggested that this
would lead to less researchers sharing data. On a higher level journals and
research institutions might also decide that it is even more important to
reinforce data availability policies and subject authors to more scrutiny.

 

It is a very embarrassing case, where less transparency is not a solution. 

 

More comments? Check out the blog
<http://blog.okfn.org/2013/04/22/reinhart-rogoff-revisited-why-we-need-open-
data-in-economics/> 




Velichka Dimitrova

Open Economics Project Coordinator

Open Knowledge Foundation

http://okfn.org | http://openeconomics.net

 

 

 

On 20 April 2013 18:24, Tony Bowden <tony at mysociety.org
<mailto:tony at mysociety.org> > wrote:

> To the extent that the study resulted in suboptimal policies, the period
> during which these wrong policies prevailed would have been shorter.

Which, surely, is "not very much, really"?

As you go on to say: "economics data is most often used to justify
predetermined ideological positions"

Yes, there are certainly people who used this study to (quite loudly)
back up their existing positions, but I think it's stretching things
to think that the study actually changed policy. If this study had had
a different outcome it would either have been ignored, or used by
people to back up whichever ideas it happened to now coincide with -
just as people are already doing with the rebuttal.

The battle lines in this area of economic theory were drawn long
before 2010, and are likely to continue for quite some time.

Tony


_______________________________________________
okfn-discuss mailing list
okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org> 
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20130422/9f312f6f/attachment.html>