Skip to main content

Optimisation and “Thoughtful Conjecturing” as Principles of Analytical Guidance in Social Decision Making

  • Conference paper
  • 2571 Accesses

Part of the book series: New Economic Windows ((NEW))

Abstract

The XXth can be considered the Century of the culture of optimisation, that has been outstandingly improved and applied. There is a difference, however, between applying it to complicate technical problems, such as the war logistics, or to complex social choices, where the identification of measurable objectives and their relative weights cannot be objective and stable through time. Ex ante evaluation of actions cannot be considered as a task having an objective or scientific nature, since a part of it depends on forecasting future events, the effectiveness of which depends only on elements of systemic inertia. Despite its non-scientific basis, the use of evaluation criteria may improve, in a probabilistic sense, the quality of decisions, since, as a procedure, it contributes to confer order to the imagination of the decision makers, to reflect in qualitative terms about possible futures, to communicate, to reach consensus. Its wide use tends to produce routines, that on the one side contribute to stabilise the environment and to make it forecastable but, on the other side, tend to hinder innovative projects. Still it remains basically an art, while often it disguises itself as being objective. The associated risks are analysed in detail.

I am grateful to my Faculty of Statistical Sciences of the University of Rome “La Sapienza”. Years of discussions with many colleagues and students made me increasingly conscious of the width of the problems and issues dealt with in this article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Amendola M., Bruno S. 1990, “The Behaviour of the Innovative Firm: Relations to the Environment”, Research Policy

    Google Scholar 

  • Amendola M., Gaffard J.L., 1988, The Innovative Choice, Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K.J., Debreu, G., 1954, “Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy”, Econometrica, pp. 265–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R: The Evolution of Cooperation, Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, New York, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  • Barone, E., 1908, “Il Ministro della Produzione in uno Stato Collettivista”, Giornale degli Economisti; reprinted in English in Hayek F.A., Collectivist Economic Planning, Routledge, London, 1935

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, K, 1999, A Theory of Art, Oxford University Press, US

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, S., 1984, “Itinerari critici sui fondamenti razionali delle scelte collettive”, Istituto di Economia, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Mimeo

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, S., 1986, “La scelta del decisore come processo culturalmente connnotato”, Sacconi L., (ed.), La decisione: razionalità collettiva e strategie nell’amministrazione e nelle organizzazioni, Franco Angeli

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, S., De Lellis, A. 1992, The Economics of ex-ante coordination, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P. 1990, “The economics of compatibility standards: an introduction to recent research”, in Economics of Innovation and New Technology

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P. 1991, “Path-dependency: putting the past into the future of economics”, Journal of Economic Literature

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P.K., 1994, La scienza come arte, Laterza

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C., 1987, Technological policies and Economic Performance: lessons from Japan, F.Pinter, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, J., 1975, The Emergence of Probability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., 2002, “Maps of Bounded Rationality: a Perspective on Intuitive Judgement and Choice”, Nobel Prize Lecture, December 8. Reprinted in American Economic Review, 2003

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Frederick, S., 2002, “Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgement”, in T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (eds.), Heuristics and Biases, (pp. 49–81), Cambridge University Press, New York

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, S., Rosenberg, N., 1986, “An overview of innovation”, in Landau, R., Rosemberg, N. (eds.), The Positive Sum Strategy, National Academy Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T.S, 1970, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn, Chicago, Chicago Univ. Pr

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, O.R., 1936, 1937, “On the Economic Theory of Socialism”, Part I and Part II, Review of Economic Studies

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, E.R., 1919, Die Gerechtigkeit der Besteuerung. Eine Analyse der Steuerprinzipien auf der Grundlage der Grenznutzentheorie, Gleerup and H.Ohlsson, Lund; Ch. 4 translated as “Just Taxation: a Positive Solution”, in Musgrave R.A. and Peacock A.T. (eds), Classics in the Theory of Public Financ, MacMillan, London, 1958

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall B., 1988, “Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation”, in Dosi G. et al. (eds.) Technical Change and Economic Theory, Frances Printer

    Google Scholar 

  • Mach E., 1905, Knowledge and Error: Sketches on the Psychology of Enquiry, D. Reidel Publishing Co., (Dordrecht), 1976

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariotti S., 1989, “Efficienza dinamica e sistemi di imprese”, Economia e Politica Industriale

    Google Scholar 

  • Montesano A., “La nozione di razionalità in economia”, Rivista Italiana di Economia, 2005/1

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern O., 1950, On the Accuracy of Economic Observations, Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson R., 1990, “Capitalism as an engine of progress”, Research Policy

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolo’ E., 1990, “Metaproject Analysis: a new method for scenario generation”, Idate Xii Conference, Monpellier

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelmann C., Olbrechts-Tyteca L., 1958, Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique, Presses Universitaires de France

    Google Scholar 

  • Petit M.L., 1990, Control theory and dynamic games in economic policy analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Pigou, A.C., 1920, The Economics of Welfare, London, MacMillan

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H., 1968, Decision analysis: Introductory Lecture on Choices under Uncertainty, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G.B., 1960. Information and Investment. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P.A., 1954, “The Pure Theory of Public Ecpenditures”, Review of Economics and Statistics, pp. 387–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P.A., 1948, Foundations of Economic Analysis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverberg G., Dosi G., Orsenigo L., 1988, “Innovation, diversity and diffusion: a self-organization model”, Economic Journal

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon H., 1955, “A Behavioural Model of Rational Choice”, Quarterly Journal of Economics

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon H., 1957, Models of man, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Simon H., 1981, The Sciences of the Artificial, Mit Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich K.E., West R.F., 2000, “Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece D., 1989, “Concorrenza e competizione delle strategie di sviluppo tecnologico”, Economia e Politica Industriale

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrisi S., 1988, “Apprendimento da cooperazione tra imprese e cooperazione tecnologica”, Economia e Politica Industriale

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D., 1981, “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice”, Science, 211, 1124–1131

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D., 1983, “Extensional vs. Intuitive Reasoning: the Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgement”, Psychological Review, 90, 293–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D., 1986, “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions”, Journal of Business, 59, 251–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A. et Al. 1989, Decision making: Descriptive, normative and prescriptive interactions, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacca’ S., Zanfei A., 1989, “L’impresa globale come sistema aperto a rapporti di cooperazione”, Economia e Politica Industriale

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann J., Morgenstern O., 1944, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bruno, S. (2010). Optimisation and “Thoughtful Conjecturing” as Principles of Analytical Guidance in Social Decision Making. In: Faggini, M., Vinci, C.P. (eds) Decision Theory and Choices: a Complexity Approach. New Economic Windows. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1778-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics