Files
Abstract
In May 2004 a conference was held at Cornell University entitled “75 Years of
Development Research.”.1 Apart from the usual array of theoretical and empirical papers
on development, a number of panels took stock of the state of development economics
and discussed a range of methodological issues. One commentary that stood out in the
challenge it posed to the current state of development economics was, “Is there Too Little
Theory in Development Economics Today?” by Dilip Mookherjee. He answered his own
question in the affirmative. Given the debate it generated, after the conference it was
circulated to a number of leading development economists who had been present at the
conference, and responses were invited. Pranab Bardhan sent in a response, “Theory or
Empirics in Development Economics,” as did Kaushik Basu, “The New Empirical
Development Economics: Remarks on its Philosophical Foundations.” These papers were
largely supportive of the position taken by Mookherjee. There then followed a response
to all three of these papers by Abhijit Banerjee, “‘New Development Economics’ and the
Challenge to Theory,” which mounted a defense of the current empirical methods in
development economics. Ravi Kanbur then followed with his comments, “Goldilocks
Development Economics.” Ravi Kanbur also took the responsibility of coordinating the
contributions. These five papers are being brought together here in this symposium in
Economic and Political Weekly.