Anand Shrivastava
Anand Shrivastava is an Associate Professor of Economics at Azim Premji University, Bangalore, and a Faculty Fellow at the Centre for Sustainable Employment. He completed his PhD in Economics at the University of Cambridge. He also has an MPhil and a Graduate Diploma in Economics from the University of Cambridge and a B.Tech. in Mechanical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. His PhD research consisted of theoretical and empirical work on the economics of conflict. Since then he has worked on labour economics, economics of networks, and on interactions between economics and issues of religion, politics and history.
Follow Anand on:
Website
Follow Anand on:
Website
Anand Shrivastava is an Associate Professor of Economics at Azim Premji University, Bangalore, and a Faculty Fellow at the Centre for Sustainable Employment. He completed his PhD in Economics at the University of Cambridge. He also has an MPhil and a Graduate Diploma in Economics from the University of Cambridge and a B.Tech. in Mechanical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. His PhD research consisted of theoretical and empirical work on the economics of conflict. Since then he has worked on labour economics, economics of networks, and on interactions between economics and issues of religion, politics and history.
In their own words…
IEA: Can you tell us what made you pursue a career in economics?
Anand: I was trained as an engineer in college and was running a factory producing instant coffee, when I decided to change tracks and get into economics. I got interested in economic questions through an NGO working on wildlife conservation and their work on human-wildlife conflict. I delved deeper into the discipline and found that economics offered frameworks to systematically think about important issues like poverty, inequality and the environment, which I really wanted to engage with. This led me to quit my job to pursue graduate studies in Economics, which then led to an academic career.
IEA: You have written on the interactions among religion, politics, and labor markets. Can you tell us a few things this research has concluded?
Anand: It is, perhaps, not surprising that social identities like religion, caste and ethnicity, around which society is structured and which largely determine who one socially interacts with, influence the political choices that people make. My research has shown that religious riots increase the vote share of the party that identifies with the majority religion. These social structures also influence economic choices and outcomes, especially in developing countries where markets like labour, land and credit are largely informal. In past work with co-authors I have shown the extent to which gender and caste determine type of work and, hence, earnings in India, and in ongoing work we are showing the same for religion as well. In recent research with co-authors I show that borrowing in times of distress also depends on such factors – the more important people you know, the larger amount you are able to borrow given similar levels of distress. A lot of work in this area is yet to be done and I hope more people get interested in these questions.
IEA: You have been somewhat critical of the contributions of behavioral economics. Can you say a bit about that.
Anand: My key argument is actually apparent from the title of the article this question refers to. It is called “Why Behavioural Economics will not save the world”. The behavioural approach to economics has successfully brought in insights from psychology to bear on our understanding of economic behaviour and has demonstrated ways in which the standard model systematically fails in explaining economic phenomena. However, I think that alternative models offered by behavioral economists do not deviate significantly from the existing ones and, in most cases, add additional parameters to conform to the observed laboratory results, while remaining within the framework that views the world as a collection of unconnected utility-maximising agents. We need to think more broadly of modeling approaches that can provide a coherent alternative theoretical framework while being able to explain a lot more of observed economic behaviour. These could include modeling the economy as a complex system and using simulation-based tools like agent based modeling.
IEA: Researchers based in developing countries sometimes face serious obstacles in accessing research networks that are based largely in advanced countries. Would you have some advice for younger scholars?
Anand: Before I share my advice, I would like to say that economists, as a community, should try and shift the center of gravity of the discipline and I think that more south-south collaboration is urgently needed towards this. Given the current situation though, it would benefit young scholars in developing countries if they make it a priority to try and visit universities in advanced countries. I have found that meeting people in person facilitates working relationships like nothing else. These visits could be for conferences, workshops or longer fellowships. Any connections formed during these visits can then be fostered through collaborative work and will turn into conduits for accessing these networks.