Frontiers of knowledge

From An Amazing Consensus among Economists: Not by Bryan Caplan

Caplan's point is that on numerous policy issues, some having to do directly with economics (such as international trade) and some only tangentially related (abortion), there is little policy consensus among economics experts. Here are the seventeen questions. The economists were asked whether they 1) support strongly, 2) support, not strongly, 3) neutral, 4) oppose, not strongly, and 5) oppose strongly.

Higher minimum wages
Tighter restrictions (e.g., tariffs and quotas) on imported goods
Tighter requirements for the permitting of new pharmaceuticals and medical devices
Tighter restrictions on private parties engaging in discrimination (on the basis of race,
gender, age, ethnicity, religion or sexual-orientation) against other private parties, in
employment or accommodations
Tighter restrictions on the buying and selling of human organs
Tighter workplace safety regulation (e.g., by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA))
Tighter air-quality and water-quality regulation (e.g., by the Env. Protection Ag. (EPA))
Tighter requirements on occupational licensing
Tighter restrictions on prostitution
Tighter restrictions on gambling
Tighter controls on immigration
Tighter restrictions on adult women having an abortion
Tighter restrictions on “hard” drugs such as cocaine and heroin
More redistribution (e.g., transfer and aid programs and tax progressivity)
More funding of the public school system
More benefits and coverage by Medicaid
More American military aid or presence abroad to promote democracy and the rule of
law

and here are the results.

On two items, trade and abortion, there is substantial agreement. On three more there is general agreement, funding for public schools, EPA and private discrimination. Other than those 5 out of 17, there is substantial disagreement among the experts.

This caught my eye given some of the books I am currently reading including It Ain't Necessarily So, Future Babble, Being Wrong, The Half-Life of Facts, The Signal and the Noise, and Why Most Things Fail. All deal with the issue of the inaccuracy of forecasts, particularly those of experts as well as the balancing act between foxes and hedgehogs.

Virtually all of the seventeen items are issues not resolvable by evidence, i.e. they are faith based judgments dependent on values. The one that comes closest to a evidentiary question is that regarding the benefits if international trade, the one question on which there is also the greatest consensus.

This highlights the challenge of any public decision-making. For complex issues in a dynamic and uncertain environment, we are usually operating beyond the knowledge frontier in the realms of faith and belief where there is not an answer to be had but at best a preponderence of belief.