POPULARITY
6 episodes with new economic thinking
6 episodes with new economic thinking
3 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
2 episodes with new economic thinking
Doyne Farmer is something of a rebel. Back in the seventies, when he was a student, he walked into a casino in Las Vegas, sat down at a roulette table and beat the house. To anyone watching the wheel spin and the ball clatter to its final resting place, his choice of number would've looked like a lucky guess. But knowing the physics of the game and armed with the world's first wearable computer, which he'd designed, a seemingly random win was actually somewhat predictable.Doyne is an American scientist and entrepreneur who pioneered many of the fields that define the scientific agenda of our time, from chaos theory and complex systems to wearable computing. He uses big data and evermore powerful computers to apply complex systems science to the economy, to better predict our future. Much like roulette, economics can appear random but, with the right tools and understanding, it is anything but.Now Director of the Complexity Economics Programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at Oxford, Doyne says there's a real need to act, to use these powers of prediction to help resolve one of the most pressing questions of our time - how best to prevent climate change.Presented by Jim Al-Khalili Produced by Beth Eastwood
Jordan Peterson sits down with retired co-founder and co-CEO of Research in Motion, known predominately for the BlackBerry. They discuss how Balsillie helped transition the world into the smartphone age, Canada's faltering economic performance (well before Trump's trade war), why America is taking these actions now, and the ideas of Mark Carney (Trudeau on steroids). Mr. Balsillie is the retired chairman and co-CEO of Research in Motion (BlackBerry), a technology company he scaled from an idea to $20 billion in sales globally. His private investment office includes global and domestic technology investments.He is the co-founder of the Institute for New Economic Thinking in New York and founder of the Council of Canadian Innovators based in Toronto, the Digital Governance Council in Ottawa, and the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, as well as the Centre for Digital Rights, the Balsillie School of International Affairs, the Arctic Research Foundation, and Canadian SHIELD Institute. He currently chairs the boards of CCI, CIGI, Innovation Asset Collective, and Digital Governance Council. He is also a member of the Board of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Advisory Board of the Stockholm Resilience Centre; an Honorary Captain (Navy) of the Royal Canadian Navy, and an advisor to Canada School of Public Service. This episode was filmed on March 7th, 2025.
My guest today is Eric Beinhocker, Professor of Practice in Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, and the founder and Executive Director of the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University's Oxford Martin School. Eric is the author of numerous academic articles and books, including The Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics (2007). In our conversation, Eric and I contrast traditional economics (neoclassical theory) with new economics (complexity economics). We also explore the policy implications of these differing economic theories, discussing topics ranging from aggressive growth strategies to complexity catastrophes in digital economies. I hope you enjoy our conversation. References: The origin of wealth: Evolution, complexity, and the radical remaking of economics (2007) https://moldham74.github.io/AussieCAS/papers/Origins of Wealth.pdf Getting Big Too Fast: Strategic Dynamics with Increasing Returns and Bounded Rationality (2007) https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/pdf/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0673 Fair Social Contracts and the Foundations of Large-Scale Collaboration (2022) https://oms-inet.files.svdcdn.com/staging/files/Fair-Social-Contracts-Beinhocker-v8-22-22.pdf Reflexivity, complexity, and the nature of social science (2013) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1350178X.2013.859403
Farmer is the Baillie Gifford Professor of Complex Systems at Oxford's Institute for New Economic Thinking. Before joining Oxford in 2012, he worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Santa Fe Institute, where he studied complex systems and economic dynamics. During the 1990s, he took a break from academia to run a successful quantitative trading firm using statistical arbitrage strategies.Farmer has been a pioneer in chaos theory and complexity economics, including the development of agent-based models to understand economic phenomena. His work spans from housing markets to climate change, and he recently authored Making Sense of Chaos exploring complexity science and economic modeling.In This Episode* What is complexity economics? (1:23)* Compliment or replacement for traditional economics (6:55)* Modeling Covid-19 (11:12)* The state of the science (15:06)* How to approach economic growth (20:44)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. What is complexity economics? (1:23)We really can model the economy as something dynamic that can have its own business cycles that come from within the economy, rather than having the economy just settle down to doing something static unless it's hit by shocks all the time, as is the case in mainstream models.Pethokoukis: What does the sort of economics that people would learn, let's say, in the first year of college, they might learn about labor and capital, supply-demand equilibrium, rational expectations, maybe the importance of ideas. How does that differ from the kind of economics you are talking about? Are you looking at different factors?Farmer: We're really looking at a completely different way of doing economics. Rather than maximizing utility, which is really the central conceptual piece of any standard economic model, and writing down equations, and deducing the decision that does that, we simulate the economy.We assume that we identify who the agents in the and economy are, who's making the decisions, what information do they have available, we give them methods of making the decisions — decision-making rules or learning algorithms — and then they make decisions, those decisions have economic impact, that generates new information, other information may enter from the outside, they make decisions, and we just go around and around that loop in a computer simulation that tries to simulate what the economy does and how it works.You've been writing about this for some time. I would guess — perhaps I'm wrong — that just having more data and more computer power has been super helpful over the past 10 years, 20 years.It's been super helpful for us. We take much more advantage of that than the mainstream does. But yes, computers are a billion times more powerful now than they were when Herb Simon first suggested this way of doing things, and that means the time is ripe now because that's not a limiting factor anymore, as it was in the past.So if you're not looking at capital and labor per se, then what are the factors you're looking at?Well, we do look at capital and labor, we just look at them in a different way. Our models are concerned about how much capital is there to invest, what labor is available. We do have to assign firms production functions that tells, given an amount of capital and labor and all their other inputs, how much can the firms produce? That part of the idea is similar. It's a question of the way the decision about how much to produce is made, or the way consumers decide how much to consume, or laborers decide at what price to provide their labor. All those parts are different.Another difference — if I'm understanding it correctly — is, rather than thinking about economies that tend toward equilibrium and focusing how outside shocks may put an economy in disequilibrium, you're looking a lot more at what happens internally. Am I correct?We don't assume equilibrium. Equilibrium, it has two senses in economics: One is supply equals demand. We might or might not run a model where we assume that. In many models we don't, and if that happens, that's great, but it's an outcome of the model rather than an assumption we put in at the beginning.There's another sense of equilibrium, which is that everybody's strategy is lined up. You've had time to think about what you're doing, I've had time to think about what I'm doing, we've both come to the optimal decision for each of us to make, taking the other one into account. We don't assume that, as standard models typically do. We really can model the economy as something dynamic that can have its own business cycles that come from within the economy, rather than having the economy just settle down to doing something static unless it's hit by shocks all the time, as is the case in mainstream models. We still allow shocks to hit our models, but the economy can generate dynamics even without those shocks.This just popped in my head: To whom would this model make more intuitive sense, Karl Marx or Adam Smith?Adam Smith would like these models because they really allow for emergent behavior. That is, Smith's whole point was that the economy is more than the sum of its parts, that we get far more out of specializing than we do out of each acting like Robinson Crusoes. Our way of thinking about this gets at that very directly.Marx might actually like it too, perhaps for a different reason. Marx was insightful in understanding the economy as being like, what I call in the book, the “metabolism of civilization.” That is, he really did recognize the analogy between the economy and the metabolism, and viewed labor as what we put together with natural resources to make goods and services. So those aspects of the economy are also embodied in the kind of models we're making.I think they both like it, but for different reasons.Compliment or replacement for traditional economics (6:55)There are many problems where we can answer questions traditional methods can't even really ask.The way I may have framed my questions so far is that you are suggesting a replacement or alternative. Is what you're suggesting, is it one of those things, or is it a compliment, or is it just a way of looking at the world that's better at answering certain kinds of questions?I think the jury is out to find the answer to that. I think it is certainly a compliment, and that we're doing things very differently, and there are some problems where this method is particularly well-suited. There are many problems where we can answer questions traditional methods can't even really ask.That said, I think time will tell to what extent this replaces the traditional way of doing economics. I don't think it's going to replace everything that's done in traditional economics. I think it could replace 75 percent of it — but let me put an asterisk by that and say 75 percent of theory. Economists do many different things. One thing economists do is called econometrics, where they take data and they build models just based on the data to infer things that the data is telling them. We're not talking about that here. We're talking about theories where economists attempt to derive the decisions and economic outcomes from first principles based on utility maximization. That's what we're talking about providing an alternative to. The extent to which it replaces that will be seen as time will tell.When a big Wall Street bank wants to make a forecast, they're constantly incorporating the latest jobless claims numbers, industrial production numbers, and as those numbers get updated, they change their forecasts. You're not using any of that stuff?Well, no. We can potentially could ingest any kind of data about what's going on.But they're looking at big, top-down data while you're bottom-up, you're sort of trying to duplicate the actual actors in the economy.That is true, but we can adjust what's at the bottom to make sure we're matching initial conditions. So if somebody tells us, “This is the current value of unemployment,” we want to make sure that we're starting our model out, as we go forward, with the right level of unemployment. So we will unemploy some of the households in our model in order to make sure we're matching the state of unemployment right now and then we start our simulation running forward to see where the economy goes from here.I would think that the advent of these large language models would really take this kind of modeling to another level, because already I'm seeing lots of papers on their ability to . . . where people are trying to run experiments and, rather than using real people, they're just trying to use AI people, and the ability to create AI consumers, and AI in businesses — it would have to be a huge advance.Yes. This is starting to be experimented with for what we do. People are trying to use large language models to model how people actually make decisions, or let's say, to simulate the way people make decisions, as opposed to an idealized person that makes perfect decisions. That's a very promising line of attack to doing this kind of modeling.Large language models also can tell us about other things that allow us to match data. For example, if we want to use patents as an input in our modeling — not something we're doing yet, but we've done a lot of studies with patents — one can use large language models to match patents to firms to understand which firms will benefit from the patents and which firms won't. So there are many different ways that large language models are likely to enter going forward, and we're quite keen to take advantage of those.Modeling Covid-19 (11:12)We predicted a 21.5 percent hit to UK GDP in the second quarter of 2020. When the dust settled a year later, the right answer was 22.1. So we got very close.Tell me, briefly, about your work with the Covid outbreak back in 2020 and what your modeling said back then and how well it worked.When the pandemic broke out, we realized right away that this was a great opportunity to show the power of the kind of economic modeling that we do, because Covid was a very strong and very sudden shock. So it drove the economy far out of equilibrium. We were able to predict what Covid would do to the UK economy using two basic ideas: One is, we predicted the shock. We did that based on things like understanding a lot about occupational labor. The Bureau of Labor Statistics compiles tables about things like, in a given occupation, how close together do people typically work? And so we assumed if they worked closer together than two meters, they weren't going to be able to go to their job. That combined with several other things allowed us to predict how big the shock would be.Our model predicted how that shock would be amplified through time by the action of the economy. So in the model we built, we put a representative firm in every sector of the economy and we assumed that if that firm didn't have the labor it needed, or if it didn't have the demand for its product, or if it didn't have the inputs it needed, it wouldn't be able to produce its product and the output would be reduced proportional to any of those three limiting factors.And so we started the model off on Day One with an inventory of inputs that we read out of a table that government statistical agencies had prepared for each sector of the economy. And we then just looked, “Well, does it have the labor? Does it have demand? Does it have the goods?” If yes, it can produce at its normal level. If it's lacking any of those, it's going to produce at a lower level. And our model knew the map of the economy, so it knew which industries are inputs to which other industries. So as the pandemic evolved day by day, we saw that some industries started to run out of inputs and that would reduce their output, which, in turn, could cause other industries to run out of their inputs, and so on.That produced quite a good prediction. We predicted a 21.5 percent hit to UK GDP in the second quarter of 2020. When the dust settled a year later, the right answer was 22.1. So we got very close. We predicted things pretty well, industry by industry. We didn't get them all exactly right, but the mistakes we made averaged out so that we got the overall output right, and we got it right through time.We ran the model on several different scenarios. At the time, this was in April of 2020, the United Kingdom was in a lockdown and they were trying to decide what to do next, and we tested several different scenarios for what they might do when they emerged from the full lockdown. The one that we thought was the least bad was keeping all the upstream industries like mining, and forestry, and so on open, but closing the downstream, customer-facing industries like retail businesses that have customers coming into their shop, or making them operate remotely. That was the one they picked. Already when they picked it, we predicted what would happen, and things unfolded roughly as we suggested they would.The state of the science (15:06)Mainstream models can only model shocks that come from outside the economy and how the economy responds to those shocks. But if you just let the model sit there and nothing changes, it will just settle down and the economy will never change.I'm old enough to remember the 1990s and remember a lot of talk about chaos and complexity, some of which even made it into the mainstream, and Jurassic Park, which may be the way most people heard a little bit about it. It's been 30 years. To what extent has it made inroads into economic modeling at central banks or Wall Street banks? Where's the state of the science? Though it sounds like you're really taking another step forward here with the book and some of your latest research.Maybe I could first begin just by saying that before Jurassic Park was made, I got a phone call and picked up the phone, and the other end of the line said, “Hi, this is Jeff Goldblum, have you ever heard of me?” I said, “Yeah.” And he said, “Well, we're making this movie about dinosaurs and stuff, and I'm going to play a chaos scientist, and I'm calling up some chaos scientists to see how they talk.” And so I talked to Jeff Goldblum for about a half an hour. A few of my other friends did too. So anyway, I like to think I had a tiny little bit of impact on the way he behaved in the movie. There were some parallels that it seemed like he had lifted.Chaos, it's an important underlying concept in explaining why the weather is hard to predict, it can explain some forms of heart arrhythmias, we use it to explain some of the irregular behavior of ice ages. In economics, it was tossed around in the '90s as something that might be important and rejected. As I described in the book, I think it was rejected for the wrong reasons.I'm proposing chaos, the role it plays in here is that, there's a debate about business cycles. Do they come from outside? The Covid pandemic was clearly a business cycle that came from outside. Or do they come from inside the economy? The 2008 financial crisis, I would say, is clearly one that came from inside the economy. Mainstream models can only model shocks that come from outside the economy and how the economy responds to those shocks. But if you just let the model sit there and nothing changes, it will just settle down and the economy will never change.In contrast, the kinds of models we build often show what we call endogenous business cycles, meaning business cycles that the model generates all on its own. Now then, you can ask, “Well, how could it do that?” Well, basically the only plausible way it can do that is through chaos. Because chaos has two properties: One is called sensitive dependence on initial conditions, meaning tiny changes in the present can cause large changes in the future; but the other is endogenous motion, meaning motion that comes from within the system itself, that happens spontaneously, even in very simple systems of equations.Would something like consumer pessimism, would that be an external shock or would something more internal where everybody, they're worried about the futures, then they stop spending as much money? How would that fit in?If the consumer pessimism is due to the fear of a nuclear war, I would say it's outside the economy, and so that's an external shock. But if it's caused by the fact that the economy just took a big nose dive for an internal reason, then it's part of the endogenous dynamicsI spent many years as a journalist writing about why the market's going up, the market's going down, and by the end of the day, I had to come up with a reason why the market moved, and I could — I wasn't always quite confident, because sometimes it wasn't because of a new piece of data, or an earnings report, they just kind of moved, and I had no real reason why, even though I had to come up . . . and of course it was when I was doing that was when people started talking about chaos, and it made a lot of intuitive sense to me that things seem to happen internally in ways that, at least at the time, were utterly unpredictable.Yeah, and in fact, one of the studies I discuss in the book is by Cutler, Poterba, and Summers — the Summers would be Larry Summers — where they did something very simple, they just got the 100 largest moves of the S&P index, they looked up what the news was the next day about why they occurred in the New York Times, and they subjectively marked the ones that they thought were internally driven, versus the ones that were real news, and they concluded they could only find news causes for about a third of them.There is always an explanation in the paper; actually, there is one day on the top 12 list where the New York Times simply said, “There appears to be no cause.” That was back in the '40s, I don't think journalists ever say that anymore. I don't think their paper allows them to do it, but that's probably the right answer about two-thirds of the time, unless you count things like “investors are worried,” and, as I point out in the book, if the person who invests your money isn't worried all the time, then you should fire them because investors should worry.There are internal dynamics to markets, I actually show some examples in the book of simple models that generate that kind of internal dynamics so that things change spontaneously.How to approach economic growth (20:44)I'm not saying something controversial when I say that technological change is the dominant driver of economic growth, at least for the economy as a whole. You recently founded a company, Macrocosm, trying to put some of these ideas to work to address climate change, which would seem to be a very natural use for this kind of thinking. What do you hope to achieve there?We hope to provide better guidance through the transition. We're trying to take the kind of things we've been doing as academics, but scale them up and reduce them to practice so they can be used day-in and day-out to make the decisions that policymakers and businesspeople need to make as the transition is unfolding. We hope to be able to guide policymakers about how effective their policies will be in reducing emissions, but also in keeping the economy going and in good shape. We hope to be able to advise businesses and investors about what investments to make to make a profit while we reduce emissions. And we think that things have changed so that climate change has really become an opportunity rather than a liability.I write a lot about economic growth and try to figure out how it works, what are the key factors. . . What insights can you give me, either on how you think about growth and, since I work at a think tank, the kind of policies you think policy makers should be thinking about, or how should they think about economic growth, since that seems to be on top-of-mind in every rich country in the world right now?I'm not saying something controversial when I say that technological change is the dominant driver of economic growth, at least for the economy as a whole. And we've spent a lot of time studying technological change by just collecting data and looking for the patterns in that data: What does the technology cost through time and how rapidly is it deployed? We've done this for 50 or 60 technologies where we look at past technological transitions, because typically, as a technology is coming in, it's replacing something else that's going out, and what we've seen are a couple of striking things:One is, many technologies don't really improve very much over time, at least in terms of cost. Fossil fuels cost about the same as they did 140 years ago once you adjust for inflation. In fact, anything we mine out of the ground costs about the same as it did a hundred years ago.In contrast, solar energy from solar photovoltaic panels costs 1/10,000th what it did when it was introduced in the Vanguard satellite in 1958. Transistors have been going down at 40 percent per year, so they cost about a billionth of what they did back in 1960. So some technologies really make rapid progress, and the economy evolves by reorganizing itself around the technologies that are making progress. So for example, photography used to be about chemistry and film. Photography now is about solid-state physics because it just unhitched from one wagon and hitched itself to another wagon, and that's what's happening through the energy transition. We're in the process of hitching our wagon to the technologies that have been making rapid progress, like solar energy, and wind energy, and lithium ion batteries, and hydrogen catalyzers based on green energy.I think we can learn a lot about the past, and I think that when we look at what the ride should be like, based on what we understand, we think the transition is going to happen faster than most people think, and we think it will be a net saving of moneySo then how do you deal with a wild card, which I think if you look at the past, nuclear power seems like it's super expensive, no progress being made, but, theoretically, there could be — at least in the United States — there could be lots of regulatory changes that make it easier to build. You have all these venture capital firms pouring money into these nuclear startups with small reactors, or even nuclear fusion. So a technology that seems like it's a mature technology, it might be easy to chart its future, all of a sudden maybe it's very different.I'm not arguing we should get rid of nuclear reactors until they run their normal lifetime and need to be gotten rid of, but I think we will see that that is not going to be the winning technology in the long run, just because it's going to remain expensive while solar energy is going to become dirt cheap.In the early days, nuclear power had faced a very favorable regulatory environment. The first nuclear reactors were built in the '50s. Until Three Mile Island and Chernobyl happened, it was a very regulatorily friendly environment and they didn't come down in cost. Other countries like France have been very pro-nuclear. They have very expensive electricity and will continue to do so.I think the key thing we need to do is focus on storage technologies like green hydrogen. Long-term storage batteries have already come down to a point where they're beginning to be competitive; they will continue to do so. And in the future, I think we'll get solid-state storage that will make things quite cheap and efficient, but I don't think small modular reactors are going to ever be able to catch up with solar and wind at this point.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* United States Economic Forecast - Deloitte* The Hidden Threat to National Security Is Not Enough Workers - WSJ▶ Business* DOGE Can't Do It All. Here's What It Can Do. - Politico* AI Startup Perplexity Closes Funding Round at $9 Billion Value - Bberg▶ Policy/Politics* US Homeland Security chief attacks EU effort to police AI - FT* The Trump Bump: The Republican Fertility Advantage in 2024 - IFS* House unveils AI ‘road map' but punts on setting priorities - Wapo* Did Tariffs Make American Manufacturing Great? - Cato▶ AI/Digital* Call ChatGPT from any phone with OpenAI's new 1-800 voice service - Ars* Homo-Silicus: Not (Yet) a Good Imitator of Homo Sapiens or Homo Economicus - SSRN* Is AI finally ready to replace your doctor? - NS* The Age of Quantum Software Has Already Started - WSJ* This is where the data to build AI comes from - MIT* The New AI Stock Pickers Are Destined to Disappoint - Bberg Opinion▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Fusion Start-Up Plans to Build Its First Power Plant in Virginia - NYT* Will the World's First Nuclear Fusion Power Plant Be Built in Virginia? Here's Why We're Skeptical - SciAm* The deepest hole on Earth: Inside the race to harness unlimited power from our planet's core - SF* Dubai transforms into walkable city with air-conditioned paths - New Atlas* Oklo inks record deal for using nuclear to power data centers - E&E▶ Robotics/AVs* AI Robots Are Coming, and They'll Be Made in Asia - Bberg Opinion▶ Space/Transportation* Boeing Starliner crew's long awaited return delayed to March - Wapo▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* What Could Go Right? The Best News of 2024 - The Progress Network▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Why Don't EU Firms Innovate? The Hidden Costs of Failure - Conversable Economist* Why Did the Industrial Revolution Happen? - Oliver Kim* One Down, Many To Go - Hyperdimensional* The Experience Curve - Risk & Progress* The case for clinical trial abundance - Slow Borin* Nuclear Waste: Yes, In (or Under) My Backyard - Breakthrough Journal* Answer Time: Can We Imagine Pluralistic Futures? - Virginia's Newsletter* What just happened - One Useful ThingFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe
******Support the channel****** Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on****** Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/ The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoB Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. J. Doyne Farmer is the Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor in the Mathematical Institute at the University of Oxford and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute. His current research is in economics, including agent-based modeling, financial instability and technological progress. His past research includes complex systems, dynamical systems theory, time series analysis and theoretical biology. He was an Oppenheimer Fellow and the founder of the Complex Systems Group at Los Alamos National Laboratory. He is the author of Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World. In this episode, we focus on Making Sense of Chaos. We talk about the economy as a complex system, business cycles, simulating the economy, and the housing bubble crises of the 2000s. We discuss the differences between standard economics and complexity economics. We talk about how we can understand inequality, market inefficiencies and crashes, and whether we can prevent financial crises. Finally, we discuss climate economics, how we can solve climate change, and whether we can tackle inequality. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, IGOR N, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, NIKLAS CARLSSON, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, PER KRAULIS, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, MASOUD ALIMOHAMMADI, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, ERIK ENGMAN, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, STARRY, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, BENJAMIN GELBART, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, AND STEVEN GANGESTAD! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, AL NICK ORTIZ, NICK GOLDEN, AND CHRISTINE GLASS! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, BOGDAN KANIVETS, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!
Welcome to The Orthogonal Bet, an ongoing mini-series that explores the unconventional ideas and delightful patterns that shape our world. Hosted by Samuel Arbesman. In this episode, Sam speaks with J. Doyne Farmer, a physicist, complexity scientist, and economist. Doyne is currently the Director of the Complexity Economics program at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and the Baillie Gifford Professor of Complex Systems Science at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford. Doyne is also the author of the fascinating new book “Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World.” Sam wanted to explore Doyne's intriguing history in complexity science, his new book, and the broader field of complexity economics. Together, they discuss the nature of simulation, complex systems, the world of finance and prediction, and even the differences between biological complexity and economic complexity. They also touch on Doyne's experience building a small wearable computer in the 1970s that fit inside a shoe and was designed to beat the game of roulette. Produced by CRG Consulting Music by George Ko & Suno
J. Doyne Farmer is director of the Complexity Economics program at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor in the Mathematical Institute at the University of Oxford, and an external professor at the Santa Fe Institute. He is a renowned physicist and complex systems scientist with a career spanning more than four decades. As a pioneer in chaos theory and complexity science, he has made significant contributions to understanding dynamic systems and their applications in various fields, including economics and financial markets.In this conversation with Dave Young, the Global Leader of the BCG Henderson Institute's Center for Climate & Sustainability, Doyne discusses his journey from astrophysics to pioneering work in chaos theory and complex systems. He explains how modern computational power and big data are revolutionizing economic modeling, sharing insights from his team's accurate prediction of COVID-19's economic impact in the U.K. Farmer argues for a shift from traditional macroeconomic models to more dynamic, data-driven approaches that can capture the intricacies of our complex economic systems.This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacy
The Roundtable Panel: a daily open discussion of issues in the news and beyond. Today's panelists are Aaron Pacitti is Professor of Economics at Siena College, Pavlina Tcherneva is an American economist, working as professor of economics at Bard College. She is President of the Levy Economics Institute and an expert at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, and Wall Street Investment Banker Mark Wittman.
In the 1970's, J. Doyne Farmer built the first wearable computer which he used to predict the game of roulette. While this didn't make him particularly popular in casinos, it did mark the beginning of a glittering scientific career in complexity and systems theory, as well as in theoretical physics and biology. And, along the way, Farmer founded a quantitative automated trading firm that was sold to UBS in 2006 as well as working for a while as an Oppenheimer Fellow at Los Alamos Labs. So when a guy as smart as Farmer - who now teaches both at Oxford and at the Santa Fe Institute — turns his big brain to economics, we should take note. In his new book, Making Sense of Chaos, Farmer explains how we can get to a “better economics for a better world” through what he calls complex economics. As a fusion of big data analysis and behavioral economics, Farmer is navigating a third economic way between the scylla of traditional free market economics and the charybdis of de-growth economics. Seriously smart stuff from one the world's brainiest men. J. Doyne Farmer is Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor of Complex Systems Science at the Smith School for Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute, and Chief Scientist at Macrocosm. His current research is in economics, including agent-based modeling, financial instability and technological progress. He was a founder of Prediction Company, a quantitative automated trading firm that was sold to UBS in 2006. His past research includes complex systems, dynamical systems theory, time series analysis and theoretical biology. During the 1980s he was an Oppenheimer Fellow and the founder of the Complex Systems Group at Los Alamos National Laboratory. While a graduate student in the 1970s he built the first wearable digital computer, which was successfully used to predict the game of roulette.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe
Given Biden's exit from the race, I thought it might be interesting to replay the first episode I recorded following his election. Here is my November 5th, 2020 conversation with Rob Johnson, Executive Director of the Institute for New Economic Thinking. Rob and I have made a point to talk after the last several elections. This episode is very much a conversation rather than an interview, as the two of us give you our take on where the country stood at that moment, how we'd gotten there, and our hopes for a Biden administration. Joe Biden's age was the one issue where voters agree with the Republicans for which there was no defense.
This week, Nick and Goldy talk to Doyne Farmer, a renowned physicist and mathematician, to discuss his new book, "Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World." Farmer, who is a professor at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, challenges traditional orthodox economic frameworks by applying complex systems theory. Their conversation explores the limitations of mainstream economic models, the importance of incorporating uncertainty into economic thinking, and the potential for complexity economics to provide better guidance for policymakers in addressing pressing issues like climate change and inequality. It's a thoughtful discussion that explores more effective approaches to understanding and managing complex economic systems. Doyne Farmer is a renowned physicist and mathematician who is currently a Professor at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University of Oxford and the Director of the Complexity Economics program. He is also an author known for his groundbreaking work in the field of complex systems and chaos theory. His recent book, "Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World," delves into how chaos theory can be applied to understand and address the complexities of modern economic systems. Twitter: @doyne_farmer Further reading: Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer
Hear from Lord Adair Turner, Chair of the Energy Transitions Commission, as we explore the shortcomings of nationally determined contributions and how they might be improved. Nationally determined contributions, or NDCs, are a bit like transition plans for countries, in that they set out what a country plans to do in order to meet the ambitions of the Paris Agreement. However, NDCs are voluntary, and collectively they don't currently have us on track to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees, let alone the more ambitious target of 1.5 degrees. Today's guest believes that this is a problem, as NDCs are failing to provide a clear direction for action. The less clarity there is about policy direction and ambition, the less likely markets will respond to policy signals to deliver the investment required for the transition. That's why in this episode, we examine: What are the shortcomings in countries' NDCs and how they can be addressed? Why NDCs don't currently reflect the rapid technological progress that is already being made across sectors; and How geopolitics is influencing the transition and the challenges facing climate finance. To find out more about the Sustainability and Climate Risk (SCR®) Certificate, follow this link: https://www.garp.org/scr For more information on climate risk, visit GARP's Global Sustainability and Climate Risk Resource Center: https://www.garp.org/sustainability-climate If you have any questions, thoughts, or feedback regarding this podcast series, we would love to hear from you at: climateriskpodcast@garp.com Links from today's discussion: Energy Transitions Commission: https://www.energy-transitions.org/ Credible Contributions: Bolder Plans for Higher Climate Ambition in the Next Round of NDCs: https://www.energy-transitions.org/publications/credible-contributions-bolder-plans-for-ndcs/ Mission Possible: Reaching net-zero carbon emissions from harder-to-abate sectors: https://www.energy-transitions.org/publications/mission-possible/ Climate Change Committee: https://www.theccc.org.uk/ Just Capital: The Liberal Economy: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5859117-just-capital The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/the-economics-of-climate-change-the-stern-review/ Finance for climate action: scaling up investment for climate and development: https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/finance-for-climate-action-scaling-up-investment-for-climate-and-development/ Speaker's Bio(s) Lord Adair Turner, Chair, Energy Transitions Commission Lord Turner chairs the Energy Transitions Commission, a global coalition of major power and industrial companies, investors, environmental NGOs and experts working out achievable pathways to limit global warming to well below 2˚C while stimulating economic development and social progress. Lord Turner has chaired several high-profile organizations, including at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, the UK's Financial Services Authority, the Climate Change Committee, the Pensions Commission and the Low Pay Commission. He was also Director General of the Confederation of British Industry. He became a crossbench member of the House of Lords in 2006. He is also a Trustee Emeritus of the British Museum, honorary fellow of The Royal Society, and received an Honorary Degree from Cambridge University in 2017.
In today's episode, Nathan is joined by J. Doyne Farmer, the director of the Complexity Economics Program at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, and author of the new book "Making sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for Better World" to discuss the importance of understanding and explaining economic models, particularly agent-based models. J. Doyne Farmer: Book: "Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World" More S&P Global Content: The Daily Update Look Forward Credits: Host/Author: Nathan Hunt Producer/Editor: Patrick Moroney Published With Assistance From: Kyle May, Kurt Burger, Camille McManus www.spglobal.com
In this special edition of the RECET transformative podcast, we revisit the recent RECET festival, where speakers from around the globe discussed ‘Green Transformations.' In this excerpt, three panelists charted the history of nuclear energy—from its ‘dark past' to, perhaps, its ‘green future.' Stephen Gross is the author of Energy and Power: Germany in the Age of Oil, Atoms and Climate Change (Oxford University Press, 2023). He was joined by Elisabeth Röhrlich, author of Inspectors for Peace: A History of the International Atomic Energy Agency (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2022). They spoke alongside Anna Weichselbraun, from the University of Vienna, who is currently finishing a manuscript on knowledge production at the International Atomic Energy Agency. The discussion was moderated by Rosamund Johnston (RECET). Stephen G. Gross is Associate Professor of History and Director of the Center of European and Mediterranean Studies at New York University. After working at the Bureau of Economic Analysis (Department of Commerce) in Washington DC, he received his PhD in history from UC Berkeley. He is the author of Energy and Power: Germany in the Age of Oil, Atoms, and Climate Change (Oxford University Press, 2023) and Export Empire: German Soft Power in Southeastern Europe, 1890-1945, which explores the political economy of the Nazi Empire. His research has been supported by the Fulbright Fellowship, the German Academic Exchange Program, the Institute for New Economic Thinking, the Andrew Carnegie Foundation, and the Andrew Mellon New Directions Fellowship, through which he earned a certificate of sustainable finance at Columbia University. Elisabeth Röhrlich is Associate Professor at the History Department of the University of Vienna and Vice Dean of the Faculty of Historical and Cultural Studies. Her expertise is in twentieth century global and international history, the history of international organizations, the history of the nuclear age and the Cold War, and Austrian contemporary history. She received her PhD in history from the University of Tübingen, Germany, and has held fellowships at the Norwegian Institute for Defense Studies, the German Historical Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (both in Washington D.C.), and Monash University South Africa. She is the author of a prize-winning book about the former Austrian chancellor Bruno Kreisky (Kreiskys Außenpolitik, Vienna University Press, 2009), and her writings on the history of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been published in journals such as the Diplomacy and Statecraft, Cold War History, and the Journal of Cold War Studies. Her monograph "Inspectors for Peace" on the history of the IAEA was published with Johns Hopkins University Press in 2022. Anna Weichselbraun is a postdoc researcher at the Department of European Ethnology at the University of Vienna. She works at the intersection of historical anthropology of knowledge, semiotics and science and technology studies with an empirical focus on the global governance of technology in the long 20th century. She is currently revising her book manuscript on nuclear knowledge practices at the International Atomic Energy Agency. Rosamund Johnston is the Principal Investigator of Linking Arms: Central Europe´s Weapons Industries, 1954-1994 at RECET. She is the author of Red Tape: Radio and Politics in Czechoslovakia, 1945-1969 which appeared with Stanford University Press in March 2024. Her research has been published in Central European History and a number of edited volumes. She has also written for the Journal of Cold War Studies, East Central Europe, Harvard Ukrainian Studies, Scottish newspaper The National, and public broadcaster Czech Radio. Johnston is the author of one book of public history, Havel in America: Interviews with American Intellectuals, Politicians, and Artists, released by Czech publisher Host in 2019.
J. Doyne Farmer is the Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, a Professor at the Mathematical Institute of Oxford University, and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute. In this episode, we explore Doyne's latest book, “Making Sense of Chaos.” We focus on the relationship between chaos and scaling theory, and more specifically, how chaos can be factored into scaling theory. By the end of this conversation, you will learn why it might be easier to predict the long distant future than predicting tomorrow, how Moore's Law conflicts with other scaling laws that underpin technological progress, how agent-based modeling can help all scientists and policymakers, how to dominate the world with your theories (...), and even how to trick casinos. I hope you enjoy the conversation. Find me on X at @ProfSchrepel. Also, be sure to subscribe to the Scaling Theory podcast; it helps its growth. ***
J. Doyne Farmer is Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor in the Mathematical Institute at the University of Oxford and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute.In this episode, Doyne discusses his journey from chaos theory to complexity economics. He shares his experience developing agent-based models for the economy and talks about the importance of multidisciplinary work and applying complexity science principles to economics and climate change. Resources: Purchase ‘Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World' here Connect: Simplifying Complexity on Twitter Sean Brady on Twitter Sean Brady on LinkedIn Brady Heywood website This show is produced in collaboration with Wavelength Creative. Visit wavelengthcreative.com for more information.
We look at this thoughtful attempt to dig into the complexity of real world situations and the attempts to make better models to understand what is happening around us and why. See more about the author Doyne Farmer here. Making Sense of Chaos: A Better Economics for a Better World, reviewed This is a challenging topic to do well. Models are always limited by their inherent nature, how many factors do you incorporate? How much data do you need, over how long a time period? How do you factor in the slightly to very unpredictable behaviour of humans themselves, and their inclination towards capricious behaviour sometimes? The author does a good job of explaining these challenges, while offering some small hope with positive and interesting examples. The ability to predict the weather is one example that the author refers to. Citing the observation, that, with each decade that passes, humanity seems able to predict one more day further into the future. For sure we can't yet say what the weather will be one month from now, but one to three day forecasts are pretty reliable, and even four to six days out, we are now able to have a pretty good idea of what is coming down the line. Of course human's impact on global warming, and more unstable weather systems does then counter impact on these improvements. Farmer also discusses the solar industry with interesting, and potentially hopeful and positive predications about the continued fall in the price of solar generated energy units, relative to those generated from fossil fuels. We found this book to be well written, self critical, and aiming to tackle something which, by it's vary nature is extremely difficult to do really well. If you are looking to get up to speed in any of the topics tackled then we would recommend it. More about the book In Making Sense of Chaos one of our most influential scientists, J Doyne Famer, tackles these questions and more. Introducing the new field of complexity economics, he describes how rebellious economists and other scientists are revolutionising our ability to predict the economy, developing new approaches to global problems - like climate change, inequality, and the devastating impact of financial crises, which hit the poorest hardest. These issues are all rooted in the economy, yet mainstream economics isn't helping to solve our most pressing problems. Farmer explains why it can't do the job, and suggests a better alternative, called complexity economics. Complex systems are characterized by emergent phenomena - creating a whole that is qualitatively different from the sum of its parts. Examples are the human brain, the weather system, and of course, the economy. The ideas behind complexity economics have been around for many years, but enabled by enormous improvements in computing power and big data, its time has come. We can now build real-world computer simulations of the economy that track its emergent behaviour in detail. For instance, it is possible to simulate how the occupational labour force changes through time, how economic policies affect rich or poor households, or how the economy will evolve during the energy transition. This new science, Farmer shows, will allow us to test ideas and make better economic predictions, enabling us to better tackle global problems like inequality and climate change, creating sustainable growth, and more. And, ultimately, create a better world. More about the author Doyne Farmer is an American complex systems scientist and entrepreneur who pioneered many of the fields that define the scientific agenda of our times: chaos, complex systems, artificial life, wearable computing, and more. Currently he is Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor of Complex Systems Science at the University of Oxford, Chief Scientist at Macrocosm, and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute. Previously, he was a...
Host Theo Shouse sits down with Substack writer, former Federal Reserve economist, and Bloomberg opinion columnist Claudia Sahm, to discuss inflation, consumer sentiment, Biden's stimulus package, and the Federal Reserve. References "Decomposing Supply and Demand Driven Inflation" by Adam Shapiro, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco "Is the Landing Soft? Will It Stay That Way?" by Paul Krugman, The New York Times "The Quasi-Inflation of 2021-2022: A Case of Bad Analysis and Worse Response" by James K. Galbraith, Institute for New Economic Thinking
ROB JOHNSON is a plain-speaking and passionate critic of an economic, financial, and political system that leaves too many behind. He and I do post-election shows - and we'll do another this November, but this week we talk about the State of the Union as well as the state of the union. We talk about Biden's speech and about how the two of us see things - the economy, the election, the two parties, the nation's mood, how we got here, and how we might move forward. Rob is President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking and host of the podcast Economics and Beyond. You can learn more about him and his work at ineteconomics.org
Today I speak with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Franta also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford. Ben holds a JD from Stanford Law School and is a licensed attorney with the California State Bar, a PhD in History of Science from Stanford University, a separate PhD in Applied Physics from Harvard University, an MSc in Archaeological Science from the University of Oxford, and a BA in Physics and Mathematics from Coe College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He is also a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship, the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, the U.S. National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship, the USAID Research and Innovation Fellowship, the University of Oxford Clarendon Scholarship, and the Coe College Williston Jones Scholarship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more.
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
In this episode of the Speaking Out of Place podcast, Professor David Palumbo-Liu speaks with noted researcher and scholar Ben Franta about two new articles he has written that add to his growing archive of seminal work on climate change. Ben tells us now the fossil fuel industry paid economists to join scientists in denying the true nature of the fossil fuel industry's destruction of the environment. Economists argued that even if some science were correct, implementing change would be too costly. This became a powerful tool to stall and kill climate change legislation. Ben also talks about how communities have tried to sue fossil fuel companies for damages incurred by such misinformation and disinformation. In sum, we learn about what the industry has done, and how ordinary people and municipalities can fight back.Benjamin Franta is the founding head of the Climate Litigation Lab and a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford Sustainable Law Programme. The Climate Litigation Lab is a multidisciplinary research initiative to inform, enable, and accelerate climate change litigation globally. Ben is also an Associate at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and an Associate Member of Nuffield College, Oxford, and a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is the recipient of numerous academic and research fellowships including the Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. His research and writing have appeared in 10 languages, been featured in the Paramount+ documentary Black Gold, been cited in the U.S. Congressional Record, and been published in numerous scholarly and popular venues including Nature Climate Change, Global Environmental Change, The Guardian, Project Syndicate, and more. “For 40 years, the American Petroleum Institute has hired economists to argue it would be too expensive to try and control fossil fuels and that climate change wasn't that bad. The same go-to consultancy firm has been involved in every major climate policy fight from the very beginning and hired by the fossil fuel industry, but what are the courts going to do? It's not just the historical deception. It's an ongoing deception.”www.inet.ox.ac.uk/people/benjamin-franta www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/oxford-sustainable-law-programme/research/climate-litigation-labwww.palumbo-liu.com https://speakingoutofplace.comhttps://twitter.com/palumboliu?s=20
For a second consecutive year-closer, Michael welcomes Lord Adair Turner of Ecchinswell back to Cleaning Up. Lord Turner has combined careers in business, public policy and academia. He chairs the Energy Transitions Commission, a global coalition of major power and industrial companies, investors, environmental NGOs and experts working out achievable pathways to limit global warming to well below 2˚C by 2040 while stimulating economic development and social progress. He was chairman of the Institute for New Economic Thinking until January 2019, where he remains a Senior Fellow. He is Chairman of Chubb Europe and on the Advisory Board of Envision Energy, a Shanghai-based group focussed on renewable energy, batteries and digital systems.He became a cross bench member of the House of Lords in 2006.Amongst his business roles, Lord Turner was at McKinsey&Co (1982-1995); was Vice-Chairman of Merrill Lynch Europe (2000-2006) and a Non-Executive Director of a number of companies, including Standard Chartered plc (2006-2008). He is Senior Fellow at the Centre for Financial Studies (Frankfurt) and a Visiting Fellow at the People's Bank of China School of Finance, Tsinghua University (Beijing). He writes regularly for Project Syndicate, and has published “Between Debt and the Devil” (Princeton 2015), and Economics after the Crisis (MIT 2012).He is a Trustee Emeritus of the British Museum, honorary fellow of The Royal Society, and received an Honorary Degree from Cambridge University in 2017. Links Michael's BNEF piece - Clean Hydrogen's Missing Trillions: https://about.bnef.com/blog/liebreich-clean-hydrogens-missing-trillions/#:~:text=My%20estimate%20for%20the%20total,a%20shortfall%20of%20over%2090%25Michael's X thread on battery recycling: https://twitter.com/MLiebreich/status/1733376573875609629An overview of the COP28 Global Stocktake: https://unfccc.int/news/cop28-agreement-signals-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-fossil-fuel-eraThe Guardian's piece on Aramco's Oil Demand Sustainability Program: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/27/revealed-saudi-arabia-plan-poor-countries-oil Related Episodes Lord of the Net Zero Transition – Ep 110: Lord Adair Turner: https://www.cleaningup.live/ep110-adair-turner-lord-of-the-net-zero-transition/Investing in Climate Leadership – Ep 2: Rachel Kyte: https://www.cleaningup.live/episode-2-rachel-kyte/Lifting the Curtain on Climate Change Denial – Ep 141: Prof Naomi Oreske: https://www.cleaningup.live/lifting-the-curtain-on-climate-change-denial-ep-141-prof-naomi-oreskes/Is Shipping the Easiest "Hard-to-Abate" Sector? - Ep143: Johannah Christensen: https://www.cleaningup.live/is-shipping-the-easiest-hard-to-abate-sector-ep143-johannah-christensen/The Bridgetown Initiator – Ep 145: Prof Avinash Persaud: https://www.cleaningup.live/the-bridgetown-initiator-ep145-prof-avinash-persaud/
Professor Geoff Mann is Distinguished Professor of Geography at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver BC. Geoff is an award-winning political economist and writer, known as a leading researcher on the historical development and future trajectory of economic governance set against the backdrop of the climate crisis. He is a senior fellow at the Institute for New Economic Thinking and a 2022 recipient of a Guggenheim Fellowship award for his contributions to his field. Among many publications, the book Climate Leviathan: A Political Theory of Our Planetary Future (Verso, 2018) (with Joel Wainwright) is a vital referent point for anyone interested in the radical political consequences of climate change. But it is the quite brilliant 2019 article in the Boston Review ‘It Was Not Supposed to End This Way' and his intriguing claim that ‘the tragedy of liberalism is its inability to narrate the end progress' which serves as the point of departure for our conversation. In this podcast we talk about the scale and depth of the challenge posed by the Anthropocene, the impossible ‘We', the tragedy of liberalism, and where we might look for alternative stories to narrate the end of progress, and much, much more. Geoff can be found here: https://www.sfu.ca/geography/about/our-people/profiles/Geoff-Mann.html And tweets @GeoffPMann: https://twitter.com/GeoffPMann We discussed: ‘Markets Won't Stop Fossil Fuels', Dissent Magazine, Spring 2023: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/markets-wont-stop-fossil-fuels/ ‘It Was Not Supposed to End This Way', Boston Review, 13 August 2019: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/geoff-mann-it-was-not-supposed-end-way/ Climate Leviathan: A Political Theory of Our Planetary Future (Verso, 2018) (with Joel Wainwright): https://www.versobooks.com/en-gb/products/520-climate-leviathan
Mike Ferguson in the Morning 11-16-23 Richard Vague from the Institute for New Economic Thinking talks about federal spending and economic issues facing our nation. Check out Richard's new book "The Paradox of Debt: A New Path to Prosperity Without Crisis" here: https://www.paradoxofdebt.com/ More info on the book here: https://www.amazon.com/Paradox-Debt-Prosperity-Without-Crisis/dp/1512825328 (https://www.richardvague.com/) (https://www.ineteconomics.org/) (https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/experts/rvague) Website: https://newstalkstl.com/ Livestream 24/7: http://bit.ly/newstalkstlstream Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/NewsTalkSTLSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mike Ferguson in the Morning 11-16-23 Local Starbucks workers at all eight unionized stores in the metro area are on strike today (Thursday) from 7am to 1pm demanding better handling over staffing, scheduling, and other issues. Story here: https://www.kmov.com/2023/11/16/local-starbucks-staff-strike-thursday/ Walmart, Costco, Wegmans and other chains are revising their self-checkout strategies. Story here: https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/walmart-costco-and-other-companies-rethink-self-checkout/ U.S. Capitol police were forced to remove and arrest pro-Palestine activists and protesters from the Democratic National Committee headquarters. Story here: https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/11/15/watch-wild-riot-as-hundreds-of-anti-israel-rioters-try-to-break-into-dnc-n2166406 Richard Vague from the Institute for New Economic Thinking talks about federal spending and economic issues facing our nation. Check out Richard's new book "The Paradox of Debt: A New Path to Prosperity Without Crisis" here: https://www.paradoxofdebt.com/ More info on the book here: https://www.amazon.com/Paradox-Debt-Prosperity-Without-Crisis/dp/1512825328 (https://www.richardvague.com/) (https://www.ineteconomics.org/) (https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/experts/rvague) Website: https://newstalkstl.com/ Livestream 24/7: http://bit.ly/newstalkstlstream Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/NewsTalkSTLSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Getting the global energy system to net-zero – a state in which it emits no more greenhouse gasses than it absorbs – means deploying clean energy infrastructure at a pace without historical precedent. The ripple effects of this transition are already apparent in business, geopolitics, and in people's daily lives. Increasing public concern over climate change and breakthroughs in clean energy technology have rendered this challenge more achievable. But turning this momentum into tangible progress will require careful policymaking and implementation, across all levels of government. How might the clean energy transition reconfigure the global economy? What levers can policymakers pull to accelerate it? And what emerging solutions are already changing the outlook for net zero? Today we're re-running host Jason Bordoff's interview with Cameron Hepburn about the economics of the climate crisis. Cameron is a Professor of Environmental Economics at the University of Oxford and Director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. He also serves as the Director of the Economics of Sustainability Programme, based at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School. Cameron has over 30 peer-reviewed publications spanning economics, public policy, law, engineering, philosophy, and biology. In a summer of both heightened climate ambition and heightened alarm over climate change, this conversation was held in the aftermath of the COP27 climate summit. Jason and Cameron discussed how technology developments are accelerating the energy transition and how to scale their impact.
Sir David Hendry, the renowned British econometrician, talks to hosts Gene Tunny and Tim Hughes about the state of economic forecasting and the transition to net zero greenhouse gas emissions. Among other things, Sir David talks about how to avoid major economic forecasting failures (e.g. UK productivity), forecasting global temperatures after volcanic eruptions, and the role of nuclear energy in the net zero transition. Sir David is currently Deputy Director of the Climate Econometrics group at Oxford. Please get in touch with any questions, comments and suggestions by emailing us at contact@economicsexplored.com or sending a voice message via https://www.speakpipe.com/economicsexplored. About Sir David HendrySir David F. Hendry is Deputy Director, Climate Econometrics (formerly Programme for Economic Modelling), Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School and of Climate Econometrics and Senior Research Fellow, Nuffield College, Oxford University. He was previously Professor of Economics at Oxford 1982--2018, Professor of Econometrics at LSE and a Leverhulme Personal Research Professor of Economics, Oxford 1995-2000. He was Knighted in 2009; is an Honorary Vice-President and past President, Royal Economic Society; Fellow, British Academy, Royal Society of Edinburgh, Econometric Society, Academy of Social Sciences, Econometric Reviews and Journal of Econometrics; Foreign Honorary Member, American Economic Association and American Academy of Arts and Sciences; Honorary Fellow, International Institute of Forecasters and Founding Fellow, International Association for Applied Econometrics. He has received eight Honorary Doctorates, a Lifetime Achievement Award from the ESRC, and the Guy Medal in Bronze from the Royal Statistical Society. The ISI lists him as one of the world's 200 most cited economists, he is a Thomson Reuters Citation Laureate, and has published more than 200 papers and 25 books on econometric methods, theory, modelling, and history; computing; empirical economics; and forecasting.What's covered in EP198Conversation with Sir David:[00:02:27] Economic forecasting: are we any better at it? [00:05:56] Forecasting errors and adjustments. [00:08:04] Widespread use of flawed models. [00:12:45] Macroeconomics and the financial crisis. [00:16:30] Indicator saturation in forecasting. [00:21:02] AI's relevance in forecasting. [00:24:23] Theory vs. data driven modeling. [00:28:09] Volcanic eruptions and temperature recovery. [00:32:26] Ice ages and climate modeling. [00:37:09] Carbon taxes. [00:40:10] Methane reduction in animal agriculture. [00:44:43] Small nuclear reactors: should Australia consider them?[00:49:08] Solar energy storage challenge. [00:54:00] Car as a battery. [00:57:01] Simplifying insurance sales process. [01:01:19] Climate econometrics and modeling.Wrap up from Gene and Tim: [01:03:23] Central bank forecasting errors. [01:07:12] Breakthrough in battery technology. [01:11:18] Graphene and clean energy. Links relevant to the conversationClimate Econometrics group at Oxford:https://www.climateeconometrics.org/Conversation with John Atkins on philosophy and truth mentioned by Tim:https://economicsexplored.com/2021/10/16/ep109-philosophy-and-truth/Info on solid state batteries and graphene:https://www.topspeed.com/toyota-745-mile-solid-state-battery/https://theconversation.com/graphene-is-a-proven-supermaterial-but-manufacturing-the-versatile-form-of-carbon-at-usable-scales-remains-a-challenge-194238https://hemanth-99.medium.com/graphene-and-its-applications-in-renewable-energy-sector-333d1cbb89ebThanks to Obsidian Productions for mixing the episode and to the show's sponsor, Gene's consultancy business www.adepteconomics.com.au. Full transcripts are available a few days after the episode is first published at www.economicsexplored.com. Economics Explored is available via Apple Podcasts, Google Podcast, and other podcasting platforms.
In this episode, we explore how economic issues are often talked about in ways that minimize the needs of those who may not have the means to withstand recessions, contractions, or other economic downturns. This issue takes on greater urgency in an era of trying to control inflation… and deal with recent regional bank failures. My guest is Lynn Parramore, writer and researcher with the Institute for New Economic Thinking.
In this interview, we speak with Rob Johnson, the President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking, about the state of the U.S. economy in 2023 and the recent closure of Silicon Valley Bank. Johnson shares his insights on a range of topics, including: - The overall health of the U.S. economy and its prospects for growth in the coming year - The impact of inflation on consumers and businesses, and whether it is likely to persist - The role of the Federal Reserve in shaping economic policy and its response to recent events - The closure of Silicon Valley Bank and what it says about the state of the tech industry and the broader economy Johnson brings a wealth of experience to these topics, having served as Chief Economist of the Senate Banking Committee and as a Managing Director at Soros Fund Management. He is a leading voice on economic policy and has been featured in numerous media outlets. #economy2023 #economicpolicy #techindustry —
In the wake of Silicon Valley Bank's collapse last week, Onward host and Fundrise CEO Ben Miller sits down for an interview with the economist and trader Rob Johnson, one of the most experienced investors in the world at the fault line of government and finance. Having served as a Managing Director of the Quantum Fund, Chief Economist of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, and currently as president of the Institute for New Economic Thinking, Rob has worked closely with policymakers across the entire political spectrum. Ben and Rob use the 1992 breaking of the British pound as a historical reference point and centerpiece for the orbit of their discussion. That event formed out of a collision of geopolitical forces, interest rate policy, and cross-institutional financial interactions, all with significant parallels to the world today. And, as Ben and Rob discuss, the pound's collapse had implications that went far beyond a single bank or country's ability to function — it ushered in a new era of the power and peril of global finance. Have questions or feedback about this episode? Drop us a note at Onward@Fundrise.com. Onward is hosted by Ben Miller, co-founder and CEO of Fundrise, and Cardiff Garcia, co-founder of Bazaar Audio and host of the economics-focused podcast The New Bazaar (after spending many years as the co-creator and co-host of NPR's The Indicator podcast). Podcast production by The Podcast Consultant. Music by Seaplane Armada. About Fundrise With over 1 million users, Fundrise is America's largest direct-to-investor alternative asset investment platform. Since 2012, our mission has been to build a better financial system by empowering the individual. We make it easier and more efficient than ever for anyone to invest in institutional-quality private alternative assets — all at the touch of a button. Please see the Fundrise Flagship Real Estate Fund website (http://fundriseintervalfund.com), Fundrise Income Fund website (http://fundriseincomerealestatefund.com), and Fundrise Innovation Fund website (http://fundrise.com/innovation) for more information on each fund, including each fund's prospectus. For the publicly filed offering circulars of the Fundrise eREITs and eFunds, not all of which may be currently qualified by the SEC, please see fundrise.com/oc. Want to see the specific properties that make up and power Fundrise portfolios? Check out our active and past projects at www.fundrise.com/assets.
In this KEEN ON episode, Andrew talks to the co-author of BIG CON, Rosie Collington about how how the consulting industry weakens our businesses, infantilizes our governments, and warps our economies Rosie Collington is a Ph.D. candidate at the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose, where she researches the political economy of outsourcing. She has written for The Guardian, OpenDemocracy, and The Independent. Her research has been published by New Political Economy and the Institute for New Economic Thinking, and she has conducted policy research for a number of organizations including Common Wealth and the British Heart Foundation, where she also previously worked within an outsourced team from Deloitte. She is the co-author of "The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens Our Businesses, Infantilizes Our Governments, and Warps Our Economies" (2023) Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
#CzechMate #revival #newseason #TomasSedlacek Tomas Sedlacek is an economist and philosopher. He is author of Economics of Good and Evil (OUP, 2011) that was translated into 22 languages and won prices for original philosophical contribution to economics. He was a member of the Program Council of New Economic Thinking of WEF in Davos and advised EC president Barroso on New Narrative for Europe. In March 2020, he joined the Economic Advisory Team for the Central Crisis Staff, which is included in the system of the National Security Council under the Czech Republic's Government. I production & graphic design @TerezaSlapotova2023 I
Oxford economists are currently running the world's first Universal Job Guarantee program in Austria, and so far the results are very promising. When unemployed people have guaranteed access to training and/or a job, those people feel more in control of their lives and become more financially secure…and happier, too. The study's co-authors join us to explain why they believe a guaranteed jobs program like this could work in other countries—including the United States. Maximilian Kasy is a Professor of Economics at the University of Oxford Lukas Lehner is an Economist at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School (INET Oxford) and the Department of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford Twitter: @maxkasy, @LukasLehner_ World's first universal job guarantee boosts wellbeing and eliminates long-term unemployment https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/news/worlds-first-universal-job-guarantee-boosts-wellbeing-and-eliminates-long-term-unemployment Does the future of work include a Federal Jobs Guarantee? https://pitchforkeconomics.com/episode/does-the-future-of-work-include-a-federal-jobs-guarantee-with-pavlina-tcherneva-and-representative-ro-khanna Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer
The first time I heard you could charge $47 for a PDF less than 50 pages long, I was shocked. When I first encountered an online course selling for $2000, I about fell out of my chair. Of course, it wasn't long until I, too, was selling information products for more than my first car cost. Of course, I'm also an autodidact who benefits greatly from the proliferation of “free” information. And I'm a writer and podcaster who chooses to make 99% of what I make free to consume and use. I've benefited from both sides of the equation when it comes to the economics of information. And so this episode is a long time coming. It's an exploration of the seeming paradox at the heart of how we value information. And this episode covers some broad territory: from the 1960s and Stewart Brand who originated the phrase “information wants to be free,” to how information gets priced, to a case study on two of my most popular forays into information products, to feminist economics and the erasure of care work.Footnotes: “The Real Legacy of Stewart Brand w/ Malcolm Harris” on Tech Won't Save Us with Paris Marx “The Zen Playboy” by Malcolm Harris in The Nation My courses on CreativeLive “Feminist Economics” video series from the Institute of New Economic Thinking, hosted by economist Jayati Ghosh Berik, Günseli, Ebru Kongar. The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Economics. 2021. 1st ed., Taylor and Francis, 2021. “What is Money? With Paco de Leon” on What Works Revolution at Point Zero: Housework, Reproduction, and Feminist Struggle by Silvia Federici “Course Mechanics Canvas: 12 Levers to Achieve Course-Market Fit” by Wes Kao ★ Support this podcast ★
Doyne Farmer is Director of the Complexity Economics programme at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, Baillie Gifford Professor in the Mathematical Institute at the University of Oxford, and an External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute. His current research is in economics, including agent-based modeling, financial instability and technological progress. He was a founder of Prediction Company, a quantitative automated trading firm that was sold to UBS in 2006. His past research includes complex systems, dynamical systems theory, time series analysis and theoretical biology.
The clean energy transition is a multi-generational challenge. It will shake up geopolitics, shift the economy, and change our daily interactions with energy. We have no precedent for the scale and speed required to decarbonize the global economy. Yet there are signs that new developments in technology, policy, and public opinion are turning the tide for a global response to the climate crisis. Achieving a net-zero future, however, will require careful implementation, creative solutions, and a whole-systems approach that prioritizes prosperity and justice. What are the economic tools we have to deliver such a transition? And what are the emerging solutions that might make this future possible? This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Cameron Hepburn. Cameron is a professor of environmental economics at the University of Oxford and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. He also serves as the director of the Economics of Sustainability Programme based at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School. Cameron has more than 30 peer-reviewed publications spanning economics, public policy, law, engineering, philosophy, and biology. Jason and Cameron talk about where we are in the energy transition – and where we need to go. They discuss the economics of the climate crisis, how technology developments are accelerating the energy transition, and how to scale their impact.
Human society is built on social contracts, but decades of neoliberalism have left many of our most fundamental contracts—worker power, social safety nets, trust in key institutions— in tatters. It's no wonder that people are pissed off: without fairness, we can't have cooperation, and without cooperation, we can't have a strong economy… or a strong democracy. Can we restore the social contracts that served us so well, or has our sense of fairness been damaged beyond repair? Oxford economics professor Eric Beinhocker shares his latest research into the psychology and economics of cooperation. Eric Beinhocker is a Professor of Public Policy Practice at the Blavatnik School of Government and the Executive Director of the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University of Oxford's Martin School. Twitter: @EricBeinhocker, @INETOxford Fair Social Contracts and the Foundations of Large-Scale Collaboration https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/publications/no-2022-26-fair-social-contracts-and-the-foundations-of-large-scale-collaboration INET Oxford https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer
I share election reflections with ROB JOHNSON, President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking (ineteconomics.org) and host of the podcast Economics and Beyond. What happened? Who made the difference? How could so many vote for the party of grievance and lies? Why does the “good news” feel so deeply disappointing? How will we turn things around? How will we deal with the critical challenges we face?
I share election reflections with ROB JOHNSON, President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking (ineteconomics.org) and host of the podcast Economics and Beyond. What happened? Who made the difference? How could so many vote for the party of grievance and lies? Why does the “good news” feel so profoundly disappointing? How can we turn things around? Will we deal with the critical challenges we face?
I can't get Plato's Paradox out of my head: Democracy inevitably leads to tyranny. The rich always want to get richer and the poor will follow demagogues who promise to overthrow the rich.I first learned of Plato's pessimistic prophesy In ASTRA TAYLOR'S documentary WHAT IS DEMOCRACY? and her companion book, Democracy May Not Exist, But We'll Miss It When It's Gone. Here's our 2020 conversation. We explore democracy's early roots as well as its current embattled state. Next week I'll respond to the election with Rob Johnson of the Institute for New Economic Thinking.
Dr. J. Bradford DeLong is a professor of economics at U.C. Berkeley, a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, a weblogger at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, and a fellow of the Institute for New Economic Thinking. Prior to this, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury in the Clinton Administration. Holding a Ph.D. from Harvard University, his latest book is titled, Slouching Towards Utopia: An Economic History of the Twentieth Century.
A focussed, and spirited, discussion with Lord Adair Turner on the work of the Energy Transitions Commission and the recent Energy Transitions Commission's report on the role of Carbon Dioxide Removals (CDR) in meeting global climate objectives… a report which argues that CDR, alongside rapid and deep global decarbonisation, can give the world a 50% chance of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. This is a fascinating broad ranging discussion exploring different approaches to CDR, the role and varying structure of carbon offsets, validation mechanisms the role of carbon markets, the article 6 rulebook, and related questions. The discussion also touches on the ongoing role that financial institutions are playing supporting the fossil fuel industry.Lord Adair Turner chairs the Energy Transitions Commission, a global coalition of major power and industrial companies, investors, environmental NGOs and experts working out achievable pathways to limit global warming to well below 2˚C by 2040 while stimulating economic development and social progress. He was chairman of the Institute for New Economic Thinking until January 2019, where he remains a Senior Fellow. He is Chairman of Chubb Europe and on the Advisory Board of Envision Energy, a Shanghai-based group focussed on renewable energy, batteries and digital systems. Amongst many other roles he has played, Adair was the first chairman of the Climate Change Committee (2008-2012) an independent body to advise the UK Government on tackling climate change.
On this episode of Scouting for Growth, Sabine VdL interviews Nicole Anderson, Founding Partner at Redsand Ventures who supported Sabine's acceleration programs over a 5-year period by providing those startups with proposition design and go-to-market strategic thinking. These two skill-sets are so important to gain customers and access capital. On this episode, they talk about Nicole's journey from a FinTech venture builder to a sustainable investor. KEY TAKEAWAYS I have sat now, effectively, in almost every seat around the table when it comes to looking at what investible ventures look like, feel like, and what success should and could be. Thankfully, I've had to go through the toughest schooling to make venturing successful and break through some of the barriers in financial services. It has always been a big aspiration of mine to break down the barriers of consumerism and finance. The path I've been on is a perfect platform to learn how to access capital because there is money to be allocated in the world. There always will be. Still, it's only when you've taken the journey yourself and been involved at the grassroots that you understand fundamentally what needs to be done. You can immediately see what the true impact of investment could be. I've finally got to the point in my life where I'm bringing it all together. I'm just a do-er really and I've always done things the hard way. Building ventures is very very tough and all the lessons that came out of that eight years prepared me for one thing: The biggest success factor in a venture is firstly knowing your market and not assuming it's going to remain static. Secondly, thinking ahead of the market and remaining absolutely relevant with your value proposition. This requires a really strong degree of paranoia which then cascades down into how your business model evolves. Never make any assumptions that things are going to stay the same or you know your consumer/customer more than you think you do. Thirdly, everything fails without money. Money will always find a good opportunity, but never underestimate the runway you need to grow and scale. We are not a VC or private equity fund, we're a private equity structure that uses very innovative project financing techniques to deploy financial instruments across a varied portfolio and absorb quite a lot of risk for that portfolio by the way we've engineered the allocation of money. We don't invest at a very early stage, except in very strategic areas, but most of our work is in the growth phase of a venture, and we've moved well out of the area of financial services. I identified 5-6 areas – all verticals or industries – that I believe in. My goal is to build a stellar portfolio with one major investment in each one of them in order to make a significant impact in selected countries/regions, that's the strategy we've taken. BEST MOMENTS ‘Like anything in life, the best opportunities come to you rather than you chasing them down. Often, what you think you want is not actually good for you.' ‘I knew that if I was going to be successful I needed to sit on the money myself and be master of my own universe. By hook or by crook I was going to do what it took to find ways in which to build my own investment structure, so I set up a fund.' ‘The real frustration of many entrepreneurs is that their innovation which is often in the area of green innovation was being misunderstood. I wanted to fill that gap.' ‘We're in an evolution phase. Anyone in the spectrum of grassroots investing right up to multi-fund structure is in the adoption phase of some kind of strategy linked to sustainability and ESG.' ABOUT THE GUEST Nicole is a venture builder, investment (corporate venture, VC, family office, and token/digital asset) advisor. As a multiple-time technology entrepreneur (CEO & Founder) and an innovation thought leader, she has gained an in-depth knowledge of crypto technologies, blockchain, and green finance. Passionate about technology business models that are challenging the status quo and providing greater inclusion for people globally and having a positive impact on our environment, she has focused her lens on the intersection between emerging technologies and emerging markets both physical and virtual. Her company Redsand Ventures, works with corporate visionaries and professional investors who are unfaltering in their execution of the green economy. It sits at the intersection of disruptive business models, and sustainable real estate as an investment opportunity. Redsand Ventures has built and exited over 10 disruptive ventures in financial technology in the last 7 years. Voted Innovator of the Year, 2017 by the South African Chamber of Commerce, Top 100 Women in FinTech 2016 by Innovate Finance, and included in the Power Women of FinTech 2015, 2016, and 2017, Nicole is also active in the London and European start-up acceleration, incubation and growth arena working as an advisor and mentor to Level39, Startupbootcamp FinTech, London Tech Advocates – Women in Tech and FinTech workstreams. Nicole serves as an industry thought leader and has featured on numerous panels and speaking circuits. She is a contributing author to The FinTech Book, exploring the role of corporate venturing as a catalyst for innovation in FinTech. She is also a co-editor of the InsureTech Book. Both books are published by Wiley. She has an Honours Degree in Information Systems and Economics from the University of Witwatersrand, South Africa, and graduated from the Institute of New Economic Thinking, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York specializing in the Economics of Money and Banking, and a Green Finance Professional from the Chartered Institute of Bankers. Website: https://redsandventures.io/ ABOUT THE HOST Sabine is a corporate strategist turned entrepreneur. She is the CEO and Managing Partner of Alchemy Crew, a venture lab that accelerates the curation, validation, and commercialization of new tech business models. Sabine is renowned within the insurance sector for building some of the most renowned tech startup accelerators around the world working with over 30 corporate insurers and accelerating over 100 startup ventures. Sabine is the co-editor of the bestseller The INSURTECH Book, a top 50 Women in Tech, a FinTech and InsurTech Influencer, an investor & multi-award winner. Twitter: SabineVdL LinkedIn: Sabine VanderLinden Instagram: sabinevdLofficial Facebook: SabineVdLOfficial TikTok: sabinevdlofficial Email: podcast@sabinevdl.com Website: www.sabinevdl.comThis show was brought to you by Progressive Media
As our world knits together, economic interdependencies change in both shape and nature. Supply chains, finance, labor, technological innovation, and geography interact in puzzling nonlinear ways. Can we step back far enough and see clearly enough to make sense of these interactions? Can we map the landscape of capability across scales? And what insights emerge by layering networks of people, firms, states, markets, regions? We're all riding a bucking horse; what questions can we ask to make sure that we can stay in the saddle?Welcome to COMPLEXITY, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute. I'm your host, Michael Garfield, and every other week we'll bring you with us for far-ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.This week on Complexity, we speak with two SFI External Professors helping to rethink political economy: newly-appointed Science Board Co-Chair Ricardo Hausmann (Website, Wikipedia, Twitter) is the Director of the Harvard Growth Lab and J. Doyne Farmer (Website, Wikipedia) is Director of the Complexity Economics program at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School. In this episode we zoom wide to try and find a way to garden all together, learning limits that can help inform discussion and decisions on the shape of things to come…If you value our research and communication efforts, please subscribe, rate and review us at Apple Podcasts, and consider making a donation — or finding other ways to engage with us — at santafe.edu/engage. You can find the complete show notes for every episode, with transcripts and links to cited works, at complexity.simplecast.com. Heads up that our online education platform Complexity Explorer's Origins of Life Course is still open for enrollment until June 1st! We hope to see you in there…Thank you for listening!Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode.Podcast theme music by Mitch Mignano.Follow us on social media:Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedInMentions and additional resources:The new paradigm of economic complexityPierre-Alexandre Balland, Tom Broekel, Dario Diodato, Elisa Giuliani, Ricardo Hausmann, Neave O'Clery, and David Rigbyin Research PolicyHow production networks amplify economic growthJames McNerney, Charles Savoie, Francesco Caravelli, Vasco M. Carvalho, and J. Doyne Farmer in PNASProductive Ecosystems and the arrow of developmentby Neave O'Clery, Muhammed Ali Yıldırım, and Ricardo Hausmann Horrible trade-offs in a pandemic: Poverty, fiscal space, policy, and welfareRicardo Hausmann and Ulrich Schetterin ScienceDirectHistorical effects of shocks on inequality: the great leveler revisitedBas van Bavel and Marten Schefferin Nature Humanities & Social Sciences Communications(Twitter thread)Complexity 56 - J. Doyne Farmer on The Complexity Economics RevolutionThe Multiple Paths to Multiple LifeChristopher P. Kempes and David C. Krakauer in Journal of Molecular EvolutionScaling of urban income inequality in the USAElisa Heinrich Mora, Cate Heine, Jacob J. Jackson, Geoffrey B. West, Vicky Chuqiao Yang and Christopher P. Kempesin Journal of The Royal Society InterfaceComplexity 12 - Matthew Jackson on Social & Economic NetworksComplexity 81 - C. Brandon Ogbunu on Epistasis & The Primacy of Context in Complex SystemsPitchfork Economicsby Nick Hanauer (podcast)Complexity 15 - R. Maria del-Rio Chanona on Modeling Labor Markets & Tech UnemploymentWill a Large Complex System be Stable?by Robert Mayin NatureInvestigationsby Stuart KauffmanThe Collapse of Networksby Raissa D'Souza (SFI Symposium Talk)
In the digital era, data is practically the air we breathe. So why does everybody treat it like a product to be hoarded and sold at profit? How would our world change if Big Tech operated on assumptions and incentives more aligned with the needs of a healthy society? Are more data — or are bigger models — really better? As human beings scamper around like prehistoric mammals under the proverbial feet of the new enormous digital monopolies that have emerged due to the Web's economies of scale, how might we tip the scales back to a world governed wisely by human judgment and networks of trust? Would Facebook and Twitter be more beneficial for society if they were public services like the BBC? And how do we settle on the social norms that help ensure the ethical deployment of A.I.? These and many other questions grow from the boundary-challenging developments of rapid innovation that define our century — a world in which the familiar dyads of state and market, public and private, individual and institutional are all called into question.Welcome to COMPLEXITY, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute. I'm your host, Michael Garfield, and every other week we'll bring you with us for far-ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.This week on Complexity, we speak with two researchers helping to rethink political economy:SFI External Professor Eric Beinhocker is the Professor of Public Policy Practice at the University of Oxford, and founder and Executive Director of the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University's Oxford Martin School. He is also the author of The Origin of Wealth: The Radical Remaking of Economics and What It Means for Business and Society.Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, and co-director of the Bennett Institute, whose latest book — Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be— was published by Princeton University Press last fall.In the first episode of this subseries, we spoke with SFI President David Krakauer about how the study of political economy has changed over the last two hundred years due to the innovation of new mathematical and computational methods. In this episode, we examine how the technological milieu that empowered these changes has also transformed the subject of study itself: digital surveillance architecture, social media networks, big data, and (largely inadequate) attempts to formalize econometrics have all had a profound impact on modern life. In what ways do new institutions beget even newer institutions to address their unintended consequences? How should we think about the complex relationships between private and public agencies, and what status should we give the data they produce and consume? What is it going to take to restore the trust in one another necessary for society to remain coherent, and what are the most important measures to help economists and policymakers navigate the turbulence of our times into a more inclusive, prosperous, and sustainable world?Subscribe to Complexity Podcast for upcoming episodes with an acclaimed line-up of scholars including Ricardo Hausmann, Doyne Farmer, Steven Teles, Rajiv Sethi, Jenna Bednar, Tom Ginsburg, Niall Ferguson, Neal Stephenson, Paul Smaldino, C. Thi Nguyen, John Kay, John Geneakoplos, and many more to be announced…If you value our research and communication efforts, please rate and review us at Apple Podcasts, and consider making a donation — or finding other ways to engage with us — at santafe.edu/engage. You can find the complete show notes for every episode, with transcripts and links to cited works, at complexity.simplecast.com.Thank you for listening!Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode.Podcast theme music by Mitch Mignano.Follow us on social media:Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedInMentions and additional resources:Toward a New Ontological Framework for the Economic Goodby Eric D. BeinhockerComplexity Economics: Proceedings of the Santa Fe Institute's 2019 Fall Symposiumedited by W. Brian Arthur, Eric Beinhocker, Allison StangerSocializing Databy Diane CoyleThe Public Optionby Diane CoyleCommon as Air: Revolution, Art, and Ownershipby Lewis HydePitchfork Economicsby Nick HanauerThe Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolvesby W. Brian ArthurGeoffrey West on Complexity 35Will A Large Complex System Be Stable?by Robert MayBlockchain: Trust Companies: Every Company Is at Risk of Being Disrupted by A Trusted Version of Itselfby Richie EtwaruHelena Miton on Complexity 46The coming battle for the COVID-19 narrativeby Sam Bowles, Wendy CarlinRecoupling Economic and Social Prosperityby Katharina Lima de Miranda, Dennis J. SnowerSignalling architectures can prevent cancer evolutionby Leonardo Oña & Michael LachmannWhy we should have a public option version of Google and Facebook (response to Diane Coyle)by James PethokoukisBryant Walker Smith on Complexity 79“Premature optimization is the root of all evil."— Donald Knuth
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
