Abstract

Macroeconomic statistics simultaneously shape and try to capture the political economy we study. Their biases mold social and political dynamics; they also infect academic and policy analysis. Political economy can both benefit from and advance an understanding of economic statistics as political artefacts. To help unlock that potential, this article builds on scholarship dispersed across disciplines and highlights three points. First, a binary debate that either acclaims or vilifies economic data is misdirected. Indispensable for public policy, quantification is neither good nor bad per se; the question is what its specific ramifications are. Second, macroeconomic statistics have been built around an ideal of white male factory work for wages. The further economic activity is removed from that image, the more statistics misrepresent or ignore it, with systematic biases as a result. Third, the real-world impact of statistics always depends on how they are understood, used, and subverted. It hinges on statistical practices, not just on abstract measurement approaches. As political economists we are political agents when we define, and reproduce, our object of study. We face both an analytical and a normative imperative to work with and towards statistics that do justice to the world and the people in it.

摘要

宏观经济统计数据同时塑造并试图捕捉我们研究的政治经济学。他们的偏见塑造了社会和政治动态；它们还影响学术和政策分析。政治经济学既可以受益于经济统计，也可以促进对作为政治产物的经济统计的理解。为了帮助释放这种潜力，本文以分散在各个学科的学术研究为基础，并强调了三点。首先，赞扬或诋毁经济数据的二元辩论是错误的。公共政策不可或缺，量化本身既不好也不坏；问题是它的具体后果是什么。其次，宏观经济统计数据是围绕白人男性工厂工作以获取工资的理想建立的。从该图像中删除更多的经济活动，更多的统计数据歪曲或忽略它，结果是系统性偏差。第三，统计数据对现实世界的影响总是取决于如何理解、使用和颠覆它们。它取决于统计实践，而不仅仅是抽象的测量方法。作为政治经济学家，当我们定义和复制我们的研究对象时，我们就是政治代理人。我们面临着分析和规范的必要性，以使用和实现对世界和世界人民公正的统计数据。