Ventana software support forum

let us reconsider the differences between the SD approach to this subject, and the more traditional one used by the social scientists.

In the case of the SD thinkers, the subject starts by definitions about what quantities are to be included and what affects them. This already is a functional approach based on how the system is expected to work.

But in the case of the social scientists, the approach seems to be about what the subject looks like, Only later do the equations appear without seeking to know how they are defined or connected except in a limited way. This approach is incompatible with the SD one.

The subject becomes even more confusing when the behavorial approach (statistics) is included. This econometric school of thought is not able to provide explanations at all, only numbers.

When will we really be able to understand what goes on in this subject? I would like to see greater coordination between these three schools, but where to start?

Contrary to you I think that SD and economics are totally compatible. The problem is at the level of economists: they usually do not take into account all the stock and flow implications of their model, which is in fact crucial for the dynamic of the model.
Godley and Lavoie (see cambridge journal of economics and working papers) have shown that it is very important to work with a stock-flow consistent accounting framework. SD provides a way to do this systematically.