Sustainability debates
Many researchers believe that even though economic growth in its current form causes serious environmental problems, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, we do not need to and should not give up the pursuit of economic growth, because economic growth can be achieved in a sustainable way in the future. In policy discourse, this idea underlies concepts such as sustainable growth and green growth.
Others argue that in practice it will be close to impossible to make economic growth sustainable quickly enough and that limiting environmental problems to a tolerable level will require developed countries to abandon the pursuit of growth. This view underpins both academic and political discussions around concepts like degrowth and post-growth.
This disagreement has been going on for decades and shows no sign of being resolved, which could have serious consequences: as the dispute continues, it is unclear which side’s policy recommendations will better help to keep our planet liveable.
In the project Diagnosing Scientific Disagreement on Sustainability and Economic Growth (2026–2027), I aim to promote the resolution of this disagreement by examining the factors underlying it. I analyze literature on the subject from different fields of research using methods from the philosophy of science, draw on previous research literature on the root causes of scientific disagreements, and engage in discussions with researchers working on issues of sustainable economic growth. I aim to identify the reasons for the persistence of disagreements and to propose useful ways of reaching consensus. The project is funded by the Finnish Cultural Foundation.
Expertise
In public policy and private lives, it is necessary to rely on experts’ knowledge and skills. Some people have superior knowledge and/or skills in a certain area due to their education or experience, and it often is reasonable that non-experts believe what experts tell them. Yet when we try to learn from experts, we may encounter problems: How can we know who not only seems to be an expert but really knows better than we do? Which experts are the relevant ones for each question we are interested in? What does it mean for experts to behave responsibly towards their non-expert audiences?
My ongoing research addresses some of these issues, especially in the context of expertise on sustainability (see above). Stay tuned for publications 😉
Pluralism in economics
In recent decades, and especially since the global financial crisis of 2008, economics has been criticized for its alleged lack of intellectual diversity. The accusation is that economics is too one-sided a discipline in terms of the methods and theoretical frameworks that are used and taught in the discipline. According to those describing themselves as pluralists, economics should include a more diverse variety of approaches and perspectives than it currently has. In contrast, the mainstream view holds that there is no need for foundational reform in economics because the discipline already embraces sufficiently diverse approaches and because methodological standardization and uniformity also have their benefits.
My doctoral dissertation, Diversity for the Common Good? Philosophical Inquiries into Pluralism in Economics, consists of four peer-reviewed articles that examine different aspects of the debate around pluralism. The articles are:
Lari, T. (2021). When does complementarity support pluralism about schools of economic thought? Journal of Economic Methodology, 28(3), 322-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2021.1945659
Lari, T. (2024). The problems of macroeconomics as institutional problems: complementing the ‘what went wrong’ story with a social epistemology perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 48(4), 661-680. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beae012
Lari, T. (2024). What counts as relevant criticism? Longino’s critical contextual empiricism and the feminist criticism of mainstream economics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 104, 88-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.02.005
Lari, T., & Mäki, U. (2024). Costs and benefits of diverse plurality in economics. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 54(5), 412-441. https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931241255230
The introductory essay of the dissertation can be found here, and a 4-page summary here.
Additionally, I have published an interview with Ha-Joon Chang, a prominent pluralist economist, and the introductory talk of my doctoral defense (in Finnish).