What is the Problem with Model-based Explanation in Economics?

Open access


The question of whether the idealized models of theoretical economics are explanatory has been the subject of intense philosophical debate. It is sometimes presupposed that either a model provides the actual explanation or it does not provide an explanation at all. Yet, two sets of issues are relevant to the evaluation of model-based explanation: what conditions should a model satisfy in order to count as explanatory and does the model satisfy those conditions. My aim in this paper is to unpack this distinction and show that separating the first set of issues from the second is crucial to an accurate diagnosis of the distinctive challenges that economic models pose. Along the way I sketch a view of model-based explanation in economics that focuses on the role that non-empirical and empirical strategies play in increasing confidence in the adequacy of a given model-based explanation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Alexandrova Anna. 2008. Making models count. Philosophy of Science 75: 383–404.

  • Alexandrova Anna; and Northcott Robert. 2013. It’s just a feeling: why economic models do not explain. Journal of Economic Methodology 20(3): 262–8.

  • Axelrod Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. Penguin.

  • Aydinonat Emrah. 2008. The Invisible Hand in Economics: How Economists Explain Unintended Consequences. London/New York: Routledge.

  • Backhouse Roger. 2007. Representation in economics. In Measurement in Economics: A Handbook. Ed. by M. Boumans. Elsevier: 135–52.

  • Basso Alessandra; Chiara Lisciandra; and Caterina Marchionni. 2017. Hypothetical models in social science. In Springer Handbook of Model-Based Science ed. by Magnani and Bertolotti. Springer: 413–33.

  • Bokulich Alisa. 2014. How the tiger bush got its stripes: ‘how possibly’ vs. ‘how actually’ model explanations. The Monist 97(3): 321–38.

  • Bokulich Alisa. 2009. Explanatory fictions. In Fictions in Science: Philosophical Essays on Modeling and Idealization ed. by M. Suárez. London: Routledge 91–109.

  • Clark W.A.V. 1991. Residential preferences and neighbourhood racial segregation: a test of the Schelling segregation model. Demography 28 (1): 1–19.

  • Cartwright Nancy. 1999. The vanity of rigour in economics: theoretical models and Galileian experiments. In The ‘Experiment’ in the History of Economics ed. by P. Fontaine and R. Leonard. Routledge 135–53.

  • Cartwright Nancy. 2002. The limits of casual order from economics to physics. In Fact and Fiction in Economics ed. by U. Mäki. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 137–51.

  • Cartwright Nancy. 2009. If no capacities then no credible worlds. But can models reveal capacities? Erkenntnis 70: 45–58.

  • Fumagalli Roberto. 2016. Why we cannot learn from minimal models. Erkenntnis 81 (3): 433–55.

  • Garfinkel Alan. 1981. Forms of Explanation. New Haven: Yale University Press.

  • Grüne-Yanoff Till. 2009. Learning from minimal economic models. Erkenntnis 70: 81–99.

  • Grüne-Yanoff Till. 2013. Appraising models nonrepresentationally. Philosophy of Science 80: 1–12.

  • Hands Wade. 2016. Derivational robustness analysis credible substitute systems and mathematical economic models: the case of stability analysis in Walrasian general equilibrium theory. European Journal for the Philosophy of Science 6(1): 31–53.

  • Hausman Dan. 2013. Paradox postponed. Journal of Economic Methodology 20(3): 250–4.

  • Hempel Carl G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press.

  • Hindriks Frank. 2006. Tractability assumptions and the Musgrave-Mäki typology. Journal of Economic Methodology 13: 401–23.

  • Holt Charles; Johnson Cathleen; and Schmidtz David. 2015. Prisoner’s Dilemma experiments. In The Prisoner’s Dilemma ed. by M. Peterson. Cambridge University Press: 243–64.

  • Kirkham Richard L. 1992. Theories of Truth. A Critical Introduction. The MIT Press.

  • Kuorikoski Jaakko; Lehtinen Aki; and Marchionni Caterina. 2010. Economic modelling as robustness analysis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61: 541–67.

  • Kuorikoski Jaakko; Lehtinen Aki; and Marchionni Caterina. 2012. Robustness analysis disclaimer: please read the manual before use. Biology and Philosophy 27 (6): 891–902.

  • Jackson Frank; and Pettit Philip. 1990. Program explanation: a general perspective. Analysis 50: 107–17.

  • Lehtinen Aki. 2016. Allocating confirmation with derivational robustness. Philosophical Studies 173 (9): 2487–509.

  • Ledyard John. 1995. Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In The Handbook of Experimental Economics ed. by J. Kagel and A. Roth.Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press 111–94.

  • Levins Richard. 1966. The strategy of model building in population biology. In Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology (1st ed.) ed. by E. Sober. Cambridge MA: MIT Press: 18–27.

  • Lloyd E. 2010. Confirmation and robustness of climate models. Philosophy of Science 77(5): 971–84.

  • Mäki Uskali. 2009. MISSing the world. Models as isolations and credible surrogate systems. Erkenntnis 70: 29–43.

  • Mäki Uskali. 2013. On a paradox of truth or how not to obscure the issue of whether explanatory models can be true. Journal of Economic Methodology 20(3): 268–79.

  • Marchionni Caterina. 2008. Explanatory pluralism and complementarity: from autonomy to integration. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38: 314–33.

  • Marchionni Caterina. 2013. Playing with networks: How economists explain. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 3(3): 331–52.

  • Northcott Robert. 2013. Degree of explanation. Synthese 190 (15): 3087–105.

  • Northcott Robert; and Alexandrova Anna. 2015. Prisoner’s Dilemma doesn’t explain much. In The Prisoner’s Dilemma ed. by M. Peterson. Cambridge University Press 64–84.

  • Norton J. 2011. Analogy. Unpublished draft University of Pittsburg. http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Analogy.pdf.

  • Odenbaugh Jay; and Alexandrova Anna. 2011. Buyer beware: robustness analyses in economics and biology. Biology and Philosophy 26: 757–71.

  • Reiss Julian. 2012. The explanation paradox. Journal of Economic Methodology 19 (1): 43–62.

  • Rohwer Yasha. and Rice Collin. 2016. How are models and explanations related? Erkenntnis 81 (5): 1127–48.

  • Rice Collin. 2015. Moving beyond causes: optimality models and scientific explanation. Noûs 49(3): 589–615.

  • Rodrik Dani. 2015. Economics Rules. Why Economics Works When It Fails and How To Tell The Difference. Oxford University Press.

  • Reutlinger Alexander; Hangleiter Dominik; and Hartmann Stephan. 2017. Understanding with (toy) models. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axx005

  • Schelling Thomas. 1978. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. London: W.W. Norton.

  • Steel Daniel. 2013. Mechanisms and extrapolation in the abortion-crime controversy. In Mechanisms and Causality in Biology and Economics ed. by H-K Chao S-T Chen and R. Millstein. Springer New York: 185–206.

  • Sugden Robert. 2000. Credible worlds: the status of theoretical models in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology 7: 1–31.

  • Tsvetkova Milena; Nilsson Olof; Öhman Camilla; Sumpter Lovisa; and Sumpter David. 2016. An experimental study of segregation mechanisms. EPJ Data Science 5: 4 DOI: 10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0065-5.

  • Weisberg Michael. 2006. Forty years of “The Strategy”: Levins on model building and idealization. Biology and Philosophy 21(5): 623–45.

  • Weisberg Michael. 2013. Simulation and Similarity. Oxford University Press.

  • Wimsatt William. 1981. Robustness reliability and overdetermination. In Scientific Inquiry and the Social Sciences ed. by M. Brewer and B. Collins. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass: 124–63.

  • Woodward James. 2003. Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Woodward James. 2006. Some varieties of robustness. Journal of Economic Methodology 13: 219–40.

  • Ylikoski Petri; and Aydinonat Emrah. 2014. Understanding with theoretical models. Journal of Economic Methodology 21(1): 19–36.

  • Ylikoski Petri; and Kuorikoski Jaakko. 2010. Dissecting explanatory power. Philosophical Studies 148 (2): 201–219.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.25

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.154
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.348

Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 338 135 18
PDF Downloads 297 133 10