Skip to content

From the archives

Outside Baseball

Looking for capital-M Meaning in a magical game

Who’s Afraid of Alice Munro?

A long-awaited biography gives the facts, but not the mystery, behind this writer’s genius

On This Day

In defence of a beleaguered discipline

Between Euphoria and Fear

Has traditional microeconomics ignored the mood swings that drive financial crises?

Janice Gross Stein

In the wake of last year’s financial crisis, Alan Greenspan, former chair of the United States Federal Reserve, expressed astonishment at the irrational behaviour of institutional leaders. “Those of us who looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity—myself especially—are in a state of shocked disbelief.” A strong believer in the rationality of decision making, Greenspan was shocked by the myopic behaviour of bankers who exposed their institutions to large risk for short-term gain.

He is not alone in his confusion. Looking back, we cannot seem to make up our minds about what went wrong. For some, such as Greenspan, it is individual decision making that was “irrational.” For others, such as Joseph Heath in his September essay for this publication, it is individually rational, self-interested decisions that resulted in collectively poor outcomes. These two diagnoses are quite different. In fact, they contradict one...

Janice Gross Stein is Belzberg Professor of Conflict Management and the director of the Munk Centre for International Studies at Trinity College in the University of Toronto.

Advertisement

Advertisement