There is a seminar within the School of Economics, Finance and Marketing on Friday at 12:30 for 1:00 o’clock with the speaker James Forder who has been a senior teaching member of Oxford University since 1993. He is now Andrew Graham Fellow and Tutor in Political Economy, and Vice Master (Executive) of Balliol College. He has also taught in Japan, France, and Thailand. He was previously an Associate of Oliver, Wyman & Co, strategic consultants to the financial services industry, New York, is a member of the Bar of England and Wales, and Managing Editor of Oxford Economic Papers. He has also been tutor and Senior Tutor of the Oxford University Business Economics Programme (a summer school programme for senior business executives), Senior Proctor of Oxford University for the year 2007-08 and subsequently was an elected member of the Council (governing body) of the University of Oxford.
He has written numerous academic papers on central bank independence, monetary policy, European integration, and the history of economic theory since 1945. His book on the last of those topics, Macroeconomics and the Phillips Curve Myth, Oxford: OUP, is due out in October. His previous books concerned public advocacy of the retention of the pound as an independent currency (Both sides of the coin, London: Profile Books, 1999 and 2nd edition, 2001, jointly with Christopher Huhne, who wrote the case for Britain joining the euro), and a defence of the ‘first past the electoral system (The Case Against Voting Reform, Oxford: One World, 2011).
This is what James will be speaking on:
There is a widely believed but entirely mythical story to the effect that the discovery of ‘the Phillips curve’ was, in the 1960s and perhaps later, an inspiration to inflationist policy. The point that this is a myth is argued in Forder, Macroeconomics and the Phillips curve myth, OUP 2014. One aspect of the explanation of how that myth came to be widely believed is considered in this paper. It is noted that the expression ‘Phillips curve’ was applied in a number of quite distinct and inconsistent ways, and as a result there was, by about 1980, an enormous confusion as to what that label meant. This confusion, as well as the multiplicity of possible meanings, it is suggested, made the acceptance of the myth much easier, and is therefore part, although only part, of the story of its acceptance.
I have heard him speak twice before and he makes anything interesting, never mind a subject that for an economist is as interesting as this one is.
Swanston Academic Building
445 Swanston Street.
12:30 for 1:00 pm