Pedro G Duarte

  I'm an economist by training and historian by heart. In fact, I usually say that I have a split soul, as I like to engage historically with recent economics (i.e., economics produced after World War II), in particular macroeconomics. I've been working on how modern tools, techniques and modeling strategies came to be dominant, or had their use stabilized in the postwar period. In common with the other "Kids", I'm interested on the particular communities and networks in which the use of those tools are stabilized, and how technical knowledge is created.

  I'm professor of economics at the University of São Paulo (FEA-USP), and several of my academic work can be found in my page at SSRN, and, for those who dare to know Portuguese, in my official homepage.

  I like very much the sand of this Playground and hope to have a playful interaction with the e-world.

 

My Content

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last year I pointed out here (and here) that macroeconomists were making themselves comfortable in the blogosphere to discuss theoretical, methodological, and, why not, historical issues of their field (see also a nice post by our fellow kid, Beatrice).

                          The blogosphere experiences another burst of historical/methodological discussions about macroeconomics: was new cla ssical macroeconomics of Lucas and Sargent, among others, an empirical or methodological revolution?

  The more reflexive mode brought by the financial crisis to macroeconomics made economists more outspoken about methodological, historical and sociological issues: how have we come to the DSGE dogma? What are its limitations? How can we produce alternative knowledge? Do publishing practices favor a "monolithic" thinking, and if so, how can we change it? What about the graduate training in economics?