System Dynamics Versus Econometrics—An Approach for Synthesis

  • Heino Apel
  • Werner Fassing
  • Werner Meissner
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 5)


Repeating the well-known statement system dynamics—in short SD—has been characterized as a unique tool for analyzing data-deficient social systems. Whether SD in fact amounts to greater realism in modelling social systems has, however, been questioned, To the econometrician the typical SD approach in tackling problems of social research must seem suspect, too, less emphasis being placed on empirical validity of SD models. Instead validity is the central theme in econometric research. Differences between econometrics and SD are, at first, fundamentally methodological. They are also due, however, to basically different scopes in modelling social processes.


Difference Equation Econometric Model Empirical Validity Recursive Model System Analyst 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    I. Adelman and F.L. Adelman, “The Dynamic Properties of the Klein-Goldberger Model,” Econometrica, 27, 1959.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Igor Ansoff and Dennis P. Slevin, “An Appreciation of Industrial Dynamics,” Management Science, Series A, Vol. 14 1968.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    H. Apel, “Criticism of the M.-P. Model and a Possible Alternative,” Systems Theory in the Social Sciences, edited by H. Bossel et al, Birkhauser, Basel, 1976.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Apel, “Simulation sozio-ökonomischer Zusammenhänge, Kritik und Modifikation von ‘system dynamics,’“doctoral thesis, Frankfurt, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.W. Churchman, The Design of Inquiring Systems, Basic Books, New York, 1971.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    F.M. Fisher, “Dynamic Structure and Estimation in Economy-wide Econometric Models,” The Brookings Quarterly Econometrics Model of the United States, Amsterdam, 1965.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W. Meissner, “Cybernetic Interpretation of Econometric Models,” The Swedish Journal of Economics, 1971.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. Meissner and N. Wold, “The Foundation of Science on Cognitive Mini Models,” Developments in the Methodology of Social Science, edited by W. Leinfellner and E. Köhler, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1974.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Th. Naylor, K. Wertz, and Th. Wonnacott, “Some Methods for Evaluating the Effects of Economic Policies Using Simulation Experiments,” Rev. Intern. Statist. Inst., 36, 1968.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Schmidt and B. Lange, “Die Evolution der wesentlichen Signalverknupfungen,” Forresters Modell der Weltdynamik, Regelungstechnik, 5, 1975.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Wold, “A Fix-point Theorem with Econometric Background,” Ark. Mat., 6, 1965.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Wold, “Nonlinear Estimation by Iterative Least Square Procedures,” Research Papers in Statistics, (Festschrift für I. Neyman), edited by F.N. Davod, London, 1966.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Wold, “On the Transition from Pattern Cognition to Model Building,” Report presented at the European Meeting of Econometric Society, Helsinki, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heino Apel
    • 1
  • Werner Fassing
    • 1
  • Werner Meissner
    • 1
  1. 1.University of German Federal RepublicFrankfurt/MainGermany

Personalised recommendations