Table Of ContentFrancesco Sylos Labini
Science
Economic
and the
Crisis
Impact on Science,
Lessons from Science
Science and the Economic Crisis
Francesco Sylos Labini
Science and the Economic
Crisis
Impact on Science, Lessons from Science
123
Francesco Sylos Labini
EnricoFermi Center andInstitute for
ComplexSystems (National Research
Council)
Rome
Italy
ISBN978-3-319-29527-5 ISBN978-3-319-29528-2 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-29528-2
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016931354
©SpringerInternationalPublishingSwitzerland2016
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
orinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
foranyerrorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisSpringerInternationalPublishingAGSwitzerland
Foreword
The world is in the grip of the biggest economic crisis for more than 80 years.
Nearly all nations are affected, though, of course, some are more affected than
others. The key political question of today is: “What should be done to bring this
crisis to an end?”
In this book, Francesco Sylos Labini, who is a researcher in physics, takes an
unusual approach to the crisis by relating it to the situation in science. How is this
economiccrisisrelatedtoscientificresearch?Alittlereflectionshowsthatthislink
is in fact very close. The neoliberal economic policies, which have dominated for
thepast30orsoyears,arebasedonneoclassicaleconomics.Thislooksverymuch
like a science such as physics, since it consists of equations and mathematical
models. But is it really scientific? Should we trust the predictions of neoclassical
economicsinthesamewaythatwetrustthoseofphysics?SylosLabinigivesgood
reasonsforthinkingthatweshouldnot,andthatneoclassicaleconomicsismoreof
a pseudo-science, like astrology, than a genuine science, like astronomy.
Sylos Labini begins his argument by analyzing predictions in the natural sci-
ences.Insomeareas,suchasthefuturepositionsofplanetsandcomets,predictions
can be made with extraordinary accuracy; but this is not always the case.
Predictions of tomorrows’ weather, or of when volcanic eruptions or earthquakes
will occur, are much less certain. Let us consider meteorology. Here the laws
governingthebehavioroftheatmospherearepreciseandwellestablished,butthere
is a difficulty—the so-called butterfly effect. A small disturbance, such a butterfly
flapping its wings in Brazil, can be magnified and cause a hurricane in the United
States. This leads to what is called chaotic behavior—a subject which has been
studied mathematically, and in which Sylos Labini is an expert. Despite the diffi-
culties caused by chaos, weather forecasting can be, and has been, improved by
better collection of observations, better mathematical models, and the use of more
powerful computers.
If we turn from this to neoclassical economics, we see that the situation is
completely different. As Sylos Labini points out, we do not know the laws of
economicdevelopmentinthewaythatweknowthelawsgoverningtheatmosphere.
v
vi Foreword
Thebutterflyeffectseemstoapplytotheworldeconomy,however,sincethefailure
of a few sub-prime mortgages in a region of the United States led to a worldwide
economicrecession.Yetneoclassicaleconomiststakenoaccountofthemathematics
of chaos whose use is now standard in the natural sciences. Although weather
forecasts can be trusted up to a point, little credence should be given to those of
neoclassicaleconomics,andyet,asSylosLabinipointsout,neoclassicaleconomics
hasnonethelessachievedaculturalhegemony.Inordertoexplainhowthishasbeen
possible,SylosLabiniturnstoaconsiderationoftheorganizationofresearch,and,
more generally, ofthe universities.
Whatisinterestingisthatneoliberal policieshavethesamegeneraleffectinthe
universitiesastheydoinsocietyasawhole.Insociety,theirtendencyhasbeento
concentratewealthinfewerandfewerhands.Therichest1%hasgrownricherand
richerattheexpensenotonlyoftheworkingclassbutalsooftheoldmiddleclass.
Similarly, in the university sector, more and more funding is going to a few
privileged universities and their researchers at the expense of the others. This is
justified on the grounds that these universities and researchers are better than the
others, so that it more efficient to concentrate funding on them. To find out which
universities and researchers are better, regular research assessments are conducted,
and they are used to guide the allocation of funds. But how accurate are these
research assessments in picking out the researchers who are better from those who
arenotsogood?SylosLabinigivesusgoodreasonsforthinkingthattheseresearch
assessments, far from being accurate, are highly misleading.
One striking result, which he mentions, is known as the Queen’s question.
Lehman Brothers collapsed in September 2008 and started the great recession. By
chance, Queen Elizabeth visited the London School of Economics to inaugurate a
newbuildinginNovember2008,andheresheaskedherfamousquestion:“whydid
no one see the economic crisis coming?” Of course the neoclassical economists
oftheLondonSchoolofEconomicsnotonlydidnotforeseethecrisis,buttheyhad
been advocating the very neoliberal policies that led to it. In December 2008, the
UK’sresearchassessment exercisereported its results. Theseshowed that the field
that had obtained the highest score of any in the country was none other than
economics, which in the UK had by then become almost exclusively neoclassical
economics. If the results of this assessment were to be believed, then economics
was the field in which the best research in the UK had been done in the preceding
5 years—better than the research in physics, computer science, or the biomedical
sciences.Obviously this shows that somethinghadgone very wrong with research
assessment.
SylosLabiniisanactivememberofReturnonAcademicResearch(Roars.it),an
organization that is active in opposing the attempts of the Italian government to
introduce aresearch organizationmodeled ontheUKintoItaly.Hisbookexplains
thefailingsofsuchresearchassessmentsystems.Oneinterestingargumentheuses
concernssomeofthemajordiscoveriesinphysicsandmathematicsmadeinthelast
few decades. In physics he discusses high-temperature superconductivity, the
scanningtunnelingmicroscope,andgraphene;andinmathematicsYitang Zhang’s
proof of an important theorem in prime number theory. Unknown individuals,
Foreword vii
working in low-rated institutions, made all these discoveries that is to say,
researchers who would have had their research funding cut by the rigorous
implementation of research assessment exercises. The point is that scientific dis-
covery is unpredictable, and one has a better chance of increasing important dis-
coveries by spreading funds more evenly rather than by concentrating them in the
hands of a small elite.
In the final part of his book, Sylos Labini points out that the same neoliberal
push towards inequality is to be found in throughout Europe. Research funds are
being concentrated more in Northern Europe and less in Southern Europe. Sylos
Labiniarguesnotonlyforamoreegalitariandistributionofresearchfunds,butalso
for an overall increase in the funding for research and development. This is the
strategy that will produce innovations capable of revitalizing the economies and
putting them once more on a growth path. Sylos Labini makes a very strong case
forhispointofview.Letushopethatanewgenerationofpoliticianswillbewilling
andabletoimplementhisideas.Meantimehisbookistobestronglyrecommended
to anyone seeking to understand the current crisis and its ramifications.
July 2015 Donald Gillies
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of Science
and Mathematics
University College London
Acknowledgments
IamgratefultoAngeloVulpiani,oneofmymentorsinphysics.Inadditiontoour
countlessinterestingdiscussionsontheroleofforecastsinscience,Ithankhimfor
painstakinglycommentingonapreliminaryversionofthiswork.Iamalsothankful
for his unwavering encouragement.
Several friends and colleagues, who have read early versions of this work, or
specific chapters, have given me valuable advice and suggestions. In particular
IthankLaviniaAzzone,AntonioBanfi,DavidBenhaiem,AndreaCavagna,Guido
Chiarotti, Francesco Coniglione, Stefano Demichelis, Luca Enriques, Donald
Gillies, Grazia Ietto-Gillies, Michael Joyce, Martin Lopez Corredoira, Laura
Margottini, Enzo Marinari, Maurizio Paglia, Daniela Palma, Roberto Petrini,
Francesco Sinopoli, Giorgio Sirilli, Fabio Speranza, and Marco Viola.
Many ideas presented in this work come from the blog Return On Academic
ReSearch (Roars.it), which has given me a privileged observation point on several
issues. I am therefore grateful to all its editors for our extensive daily discussions
ever since we embarked on the Roars.it adventure in 2011, and for sharing my
commitmenttobebotharesearcherandacitizen.Eachoneofthemhastaughtmea
lot and has influenced my ideas on some of the issues raised in this work, espe-
cially, but not exclusively, with regard to research and higher education issues.
My Roars friends and colleagues include the following: Alberto Baccini, Antonio
Banfi, Michele Dantini, Francesco Coniglione, Giuseppe de Nicolao, Paola
Galimberti, Daniela Palma, Mario Ricciardi, Vito Velluzzi and Marco Viola.
I thank Luciano Pietronero, Andrea Gabrielli, and Guido Chiarotti for our
numerous discussions on many topics touched upon in this work, and specifically
for their collaboration in the study on the diversification of national research sys-
tems, as well as for sharing with me their results on “economic complexity” that
I will discuss in Chaps. 2 and 4. I had fruitful discussions with Giulio Cimini and
MatthieuCristelliontheuseofbigdataineconomics.IalsothankMauroGallegati
forpointingoutseveralreferencesthathaveallowedmetodeepenvariousconcepts
regarding neoclassical economics.
ix
