Special session on Ethics of Decision-Making in Economics (EDME)

Scope

Ethics of Decision-Making in Economics (EDME) is a novel special session within the International Conference on Decision Economics (DECON), now in its sixth edition. Specifically, EDME values and is committed to providing a more complete view of the economics profession along with a body of scientific economic knowledge more open to social, environmental, and civil issues that are related—by hook or by crook—to the study of human decisions, the evolution of decision-making, and how it deviates systematically from the methodological approach of standard economic theory and policy.

Far from simply responding to narrow and self-referential assumptions of individual incentives, preferences, and idle selfishnesses, EDME contends that economic actions cannot be derived merely from utility-maximising drives and equilibria of neoclassical individualism since they emerge, persist, and are transformed by our relations with others, the world we bring forth with others, the more comprehensive natural processes, and the wider communities to which we belong. With this in mind, EDME aims to provide a venue for scholarly and community-focused discussion on development and sustainability, the analysis of the social economy and social interactions, integral human development and the measurement of wellbeing, welfare and happiness, capabilities, reciprocity, trust, relational goods, formal and informal institutions, experimental development economics, policy paradigms and public policy decision-making, economics and philosophy, and the history of economic analysis. Among other critical issues and matters of concern, the growing wealth and income gap, along with novel social and environmental inequalities—having starkly unequal impacts within and across societies—have prompted new reflections on economic, social, and political change processes: Who holds the key to development? What kind of human development and social change processes are we experiencing? Who bears the responsibility for growing inequalities, poverty, unemployment, and climate disasters? Why do academics, practitioners, and politicians differ so much on the importance attached to these and related issues and, most importantly, what are the conceptual tools, methods, and interpretive frameworks we need to understand such transformations and evolutionary dynamics?

Bringing into mutually beneficial dialogue, understanding EDME relies on gaining a foundation in its major traditions as well as the merits of different and heterodox economic schools in economics, theories, and frameworks of inquiry relevant to the analysis of development and social change, micro- and macroeconomic analyses of socio-economic development, fiscal and monetary policy in development studies, human development, income distribution, migration, development planning and policy, behavioural and cognitive insights, and the related. This year, in particular, we critically examine the ethical evolution of normative theories of rational choice—with a focus on expected utility theory—in line with DECON’s annual main track. We argue that real socio-economic systems have become bogged down beyond their presumed optimality, best outcome, and maximising requirements. Interest in these theories has distinctive characteristics, particularly affecting their aggregate consequences regarding income distribution, distributive justice concerns, and contemporary rising inequality within increasingly unstable economies. This consists of reopening the discussion on all the theoretical, historical, and methodological aspects of von Neumann and Morgenstern’s (1944) and Savage’s (1954) intellectual legacy, still the subject of controversies that have never ceased, also raising ethical issues (e.g., see Ellsberg, 1961; Sen, 1977; and Feldman, 2006). Somehow, the recent resurgence of interest in decisions under conditions of uncertainty has primarily benefited from the current return to the "classics" and the sociological tradition after the excesses of empiricism without any substantive argument and analytic perspectives—including a multitude of insights and reflections—and a neo-positivism devoid of field research. Among other things, the current phase of global-induced destabilisation and the restructuring of international crises have given whole meaning to the search for alternative utility functions (e.g., see Kahneman and Tversky, 1979).

Taking inspiration from the Economy of Francesco, the EDME special session aims to cultivate and foster innovative thinking and research, especially on the role of ethics and shared values in decision-making. It encourages a multidisciplinary debate on concepts, measurement, analysis, policy, and practice for human development and sustainability, crossing economics, social, institutional, and environmental subjects. EDME seeks to promote intellectual pluralism and collective purpose in economics by providing a forum for disseminating new insights, research findings, and cutting-edge works through an open exchange of ideas among a broad spectrum of academics, policymakers, and development practitioners interested in confronting global, national, and local human development challenges. A few examples of the expected submissions include high-quality methodological, theoretical, empirical, experimental, and policy-oriented contributions, which allow for a deep understanding and comprehensive analysis of social and civil economy approaches.

• Akerlof, G.A. (1976). The economics of caste and of the rat race and other woeful tales. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90(4), 599-617.
• Akerlof, G.A. (1997). Social distance and social decisions. Econometrica, 65(5), 1005-1027.
• Andreoni, J. (1990). Impure altruism and donations to public goods: A theory of warm-glow giving. Economic Journal, 100(401), 464-477.
• Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
• Axelrod, R. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1095-1111.
• Banerjee, A.V., & Duflo, E. (2009). The experimental approach to development economics. Annual Review of Economics, 1(1), 151-178.
• Banfield, E.C. (1958). The moral basis of a backward society. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Barca, L., & Franzini, M. (2005). Legittimare l’Europa: Diritti sociali e crescita economica. Bologna: Il Mulino.
• Barrera, A. (2011). Market complicity and Christian ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Bartling, B., Weber, R.A., & Yao, L. (2015). Do markets erode social responsibility? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(1), 219-266.
• Basu, K. (2010). Beyond the invisible hand: Groundwork for a new economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Becchetti, L., & Cermelli, M. (2018). Civil economy: Definition and strategies for sustainable well-living. International Review of Economics, 65, 329-357.
• Becchetti, L., & Solferino, N. (2011). What to do in globalised economies if global governance is missing? The vicarious role of competition in social responsibility. International Review of Economics, 58(2), 185-211.
• Benabou, R. (2000). Unequal societies: Income distribution and the social contract. American Economic Review, 90(1), 96-129.
• Bergoglio, J.M. (Pope Francis) (2015). Laudato Si’: On care for our common home. Vatican City: Vatican. Available at: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa‑francesco_20150524_enciclica‑laudato‑si.html (last accessed 16 January 2023).
• Bergoglio, J.M. (Pope Francis) (2019). Letter for the event Economy of Francesco. (May 1, 2019), [Ec-Fco], in OR (May 12, 2019) 8.
• Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of norms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Binmore, K. (1994). Playing fair: Game theory and the social contract. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Blaug, M. (1992) [1980]. The methodology of economics: Or how economists explain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Boda, Z., & Zsolnai, L. (2016). The failure of business ethics. Society and Business Review, 11(1), 93-104.
• Boulding, K. (1969). Economics as a moral science. American Economic Review, 59: 1-12.
• Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2002). The inheritance of inequality. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3), 3-30.
• Bowles, S., Gintis, H., & Osborne, M. (2001). Incentive-enhancing preferences: Personality, behavior, and earnings. The American Economic Review, 91(2), 155-158.
• Bruni, L. (2006). Civil happiness: Economics and human flourishing in historical perspective. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
• Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (2004). Civil economics: Efficiency, fairness, public happiness. Bologna: Il Mulino.
• Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (eds.) (2013). Handbook on the economics of reciprocity and social enterprise. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Caffè, F. (1973). Politica economica ed esigenze umane. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, 44(1/2), 3-7.
• Caffè, F. (1976). Un’economia in ritardo. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
• Caffè, F. (1981). Una politica economica di buoni propositi 1979-1981. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, 89(4), 763-767.
• Chipman, J.S. (1976). The Paretian heritage. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales, 14(37), 65-171.
• Cohn, A., Fehr, E., & Maréchal, M. (2014). Business culture and dishonesty in the banking industry. Nature, 516, 86-89.
• Cox, C.J. (2004). How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 46(2), 260-281.
• Crouch, C. (2011). The strange non-death of neoliberalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
• Cowell, F. (2004). Inequality, welfare and income distribution: Experimental approaches. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
• Curtis, L.A. (1993). Investing in children and youth, reconstructing our cities: Doing what works to reverse the betrayal of American democracy. Washington: The Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation.
• Davis, J.B. (2003). The theory of the individual in economics: Identity and value. London: Routledge.
• Davis, J.B. (2011). Individuals and identity in economics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
• Davis, J.B., & Boumans, M. (2010). Economic methodology: Understanding economics as a science. London: Palgrave.
• Davis, J.B., & Hands, D.W. (eds.) (2011). The Elgar companion to recent economic methodology. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
• De Graaf, F.J. (2019). Ethics and behavioural theory: How do professionals assess their mental models? Journal of Business Ethics, 157(4), 933-947.
• Diez, F.J., Leigh, D., & Tambunlertchai, S. (2018). Global market power and its macroeconomic implications. IMF Working Paper No. 2018/137.
• Donati, P. (2012). La moralità dell’agire nel mercato e l’etica relazionale. Annales Teologici, 26(2), 275-302.
• Dow, S.C. (1996). The methodology of macroeconomic thought. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Downey, E.H. (1910). The futility of marginal utility. Journal of Political Economy, 18(4), 253-268.
• Durlauf, S.N. (1993). Nonergodic economic growth. Review of Economic Studies, 60(2), 349-366.
• Easterly, W. (2007). Inequality does cause underdevelopment: Evidence from a new instrument. Journal of Development Economics, 84(2), 755-776.
• Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4): 643-669.
• Epstein, B. (2015). The ant trap: Rebuilding the foundations of the social sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Etzioni, A. (2018). Happiness is the wrong metric: A liberal communitarian response to populism, New York: Springer.
• Falk, A., & Nora Szech, N. (2013). Morals and markets. Science, 340(6133), 707-711.
• Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K.M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817-868.
• Feldman, F. (2006). Actual utility, the objection from impracticality, and the move to expected utility. Philosophical Studies, 129(1): 49-79.
• Fleming, J.M. (1968). Targets and instruments. IMF Staff Papers, 15(3), 387-404.
• Frey, B.S., &. Stutzer, A. (2001). Happiness and economics: How the economy and institutions affect human well-being. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Frey, B.S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 402-435.
• Friedman, B.M. (2005). The moral consequences of economic growth. New York: Knopf.
• Frydman, R., & Goldberg, M.D. (2011). Beyond mechanical markets: Asset price swings, risk, and the role of the state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Galbraith, J.K. (1958). The affluent society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
• Giridharadas, A. (2018). Winners take all: The elite charade of changing the world. New York: Alfred Knopf.
• Gui, B., & Sugden, R. (eds.). Economics and social interaction: Accounting for interpersonal relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Hammond, P.J. (1996). Consequentialist decision theory and utilitarian ethics. In F. Farina, F. Hahn, & S. Vannucci (eds.) Ethics, rationality, and economic behaviour, pp. 92-118. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
• Hausman, D.M. (2005). The philosophical foundations of normative economics. In M. Ayogu, & D. Ross (eds.), Development Dilemmas, pp. 35-54. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
• Henderson, H. (2022). The moral foundations of impact evaluation. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 23(3), 425-454.
• Hirose, I. (2015). Moral aggregation, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Holden, W.N., & Mansfield, W.O. (2018). Laudato Si’: A scientifically informed Church of the poor confronts climate change. Worldviews 22(1), 28-55.
• Holland, J.H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
• Jacobs, M., & Mazzucato, M. (eds.) (2016). Rethinking capitalism: Economics and policy for sustainable and inclusive growth. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Kahn, A.E. (1966). The tyranny of small decisions: Market failures, imperfections, and the limits of economics. Kyklos, 19(1), 23-47.
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2): 263-291.
• Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1): 3-24.
• Knight, C., & Stemplowska, Z. (eds.) (2011). Responsibility and distributive justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Lefranc, A., Pistolesi, N., & Trannoy, A. (2008). Inequality of opportunities vs. inequality of outcomes: Are Western societies all alike? Review of Income and Wealth, 54(4), 513-546.
• Lunati, M.T. (1997). Ethical issues in economics: From altruism to cooperation to equity. London: Macmillan.
• McCleary, R., & Barro, R.J. (2006). Religion and economy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 49-72.
• Minsky, H.P. (1982). On the control of the American economy. Hyman P. Minsky Archive. Paper No. 147. http://digitalcommons.bard.edu/hm_archive/147
• Montgomery, W.D. (2015). The flawed economics of Laudato Si’. The New Atlantis, 47, 31-44.
• Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
• Ormerod, P. (1997). The death of economics. New York: Wiley.
• Ormerod, P. (2007). Happiness, economics, and public policy. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
• Pattanaik, P.K. (1994). Rights and freedom in welfare economics. European Economic Review, 38(3-4), 731-738.
• Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. The American Economic Review, 83(5), 1281-1302.
• Rajan, R. (2019). The third pillar: How markets and the state leave the community behind. New York: Penguin Press.
• Ravenscroft, N. (2019). A new normative economics for the formation of shared social values. Sustainability Science, 14(5), 1297-1307.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Savage, L.J. (1954). The foundation of statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Schotter, A. (1981). Economic theory of social institutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Scitovsky, T. (1986). Human desires and economic satisfaction. New York: New York University Press.
• Scitovsky, T. (1992) [1976]. The joyless economy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Scitovsky, T. (1995). Economic theory and reality. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Segall, S. (2009). Health, luck, and justice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Segall, S. (2013). Equality and opportunity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Selten, R., & Ockenfels, A. (1998). An experimental solidarity game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 34(4), 517-539.
• Sen, A.K. (1970). The impossibility of a Paretian liberal. Journal of Political Economy, 78(1), 152-157.
• Sen, A.K. (1973). Behavior and the concept of preference. Economica, 40(159), 241-59.
• Sen, A.K. (1977). Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 6(4): 317-344.
• Sen, A.K. (1982). Choice, welfare and measurement. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Sen, A.K. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Sen, A.K. (1987). On ethics and economics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
• Sen, A.K. (1992). Inequality re-examined. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Sen, A.K. (1997). Maximization and the act of choice. Econometrica, 65(4), 745-779.
• Sent, E.-M. (1998). The evolving rationality of rational expectations. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
• Shackle, G.L.S. (1952). Expectation in economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Shackle, G.L.S (1972). Epistemics and economics: A critique of economic doctrines. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Shackle, G.L.S. (1988). The origination of choice. In Frowen, S. (ed.), Business, time and thought, pp. 1-7. London: Palgrave McMillan.
• Shafik, M. (2021). What we owe each other: A new social contract for a better society. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
• Stigler, G. (1981). Economics or ethics? In McMurrin, S. (ed.), Tanner lectures in human value, Vol. 2, pp. 145-191. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
• Stiglitz, J.E. (2005). The ethical economist. Foreign Affairs, 84(6), 128-134.
• Stiglitz, J.E. (2016). Ethics, economic advice, and economic policy. In DeMartino G.F. & McCloskey D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Professional Economic Ethics, pp. 495-519. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Taleb, N.N. (2019). Skin in the game: Hidden asymmetries in daily life. New York: Random House.
• Tarascio, V.J. (1969). Paretian welfare theory: Some neglected aspects. Journal of Political Economy, 77(1), 1-20.
• Tinbergen, J. (1956). Economic policy: Principles and design. Amsterdam: North Holland.
• van Bavel, B. (2016). The invisible hand? How market economies have emerged and declined since AD 500. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• van Tine, R. (2017). Reflections, analysis, and significance for human ecology of Pope Francis’s encyclical letter Laudato Si’ on care for our common home. Human Ecology Review, 23(1), 141-178.
• Varian, H.R. (1975). Distributive justice, welfare economics and the theory of fairness. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4(3): 223-247.
• von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; II ed., 1947; III ed., 1953.
• Veblen, T. (1934). The theory of the leisure class. New York: Modern Library.
• Whaples, R.M. (2017). The economics of Pope Francis: An introduction. The Independent Review, 21(3), 325-345.
• Yeoman, R. (2020). Ethics, meaningfulness, and mutuality. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
• Zamagni, S. (2021). Scattered remarks on the Economy of Francesco research programs. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, 129(4), 507-516.

---

---

---

Topics

• Economics, humanism, and the commons: An intentional research agenda.
• The appraisal of economic outcomes, institutions, and processes: Not a single unified approach.
• Who holds the key to development? Ethics as normative decision-making in economics.
• Developing alternative well-being metrics and digital tools to assist local communities.
• The ontology of economic phenomena and the possibilities of acquiring knowledge of them.
• Fostering normative principles within the public policy process and policy development.
• The intersection of property-owning democracy and distributism throughout the economy.
• Human development, capabilities, and the ethics of policy: Sustainable intergenerational justice.
• Connecting human and social discourses: Capabilities and social justice perspectives.
• Distributists’ rejection of contemporary laissez-faire: Social insurance and social arrangements.
• Poised between insecurity and insufficiency: economic freedom as an unattainable goal?
• Fairly allocating resources among agents: Basic functionings to predict the levels of subjective well-being.
• [Catholic] social teachings and integral human development: An appeal to political economy.
• Beyond one-sided religion: Understanding the potential of intercultural dialogue in enabling sustainable and socially inclusive development.
• Dealing with moral challenges people face as they seek happiness: Living up to one’s responsibilities towards others and the common good.
• Designing novel and more equitable education and work pathways: A challenge for social business.
• Which rationality? A wealth creation approach to business ethics and ethical decision-making.
• Measuring individual and shared wellbeing: Persistent challenges and implications for practice.
• Beyond corporate responsibility: Emerging frameworks for social and personal ethics.
• Game theory and the evolution of social and moral norms: Replications and advancements.
• What does people really care about? Interdependent preferences and reciprocity.
• The need for pluralism in economics: The Economy of Francesco as a viable solution.
• Characterising economic policy: Rational choice theory and basic structure determinism.
• On interpreting payoffs: Morality and efficiency in games and the related.
• Financial solidarity normatively understood: A distributional concept in search of definition.
• Computational approaches for spatial studies and social networks: Challenges and advances.
• Industry concentrations and global market power: Micro- and macroeconomic implications.
• The emergence of cooperation in evolutionary environments beyond economic outcomes.
• Rethinking microeconomics: Civil economy, public happiness, and relational goods.
• Natural and civil happiness, peace, reciprocity, and socio-economic integration policy.
• Common goods: Citizen engagement and collective action for an integral ecology.
• The political economy of gratuitousness: Experimental methods in public economics.
• Longitudinal studies of the social processes backwarding the formation of individual preferences.
• Another idea of the market: From a morally free zone to felicitas publica and community well-being.
• Economic policy between private and social accounting: Indicators, benchmarks, and tools.
• Human development requirements and sustainability: Implications for a capability-based social policy.
• Decision-making in the rule of law architecture and social integration policy actions.
• Fighting against poverty and the poor’s exclusion: From contractual to community relations.
• Government and institutions: Experimental approaches and behavioural public finance.
• Why does diversity matter? Reflecting society’s priorities within economics.
• Developing a critical understanding of the agri-food supply chain volatility: A resilience framework.
• The role of women in the economy, workforce, and society: Where do we stand?
• Strengthening access to decent work: Providing opportunities for decent livelihoods and income.
• Fair taxation: Understanding of the complex relationships between globalisation and localisation.
• People-centred development: The emergence of environmental and social sustainability.
• International peace and stability: Human decision-making and heuristics of judgment.
• On the economic relevance of gratuitousness: Economic theory of social institutions.
• Natural field experiments to measure social capital and risk preferences in small societies.
• Conceptual parameters of several behavioural economic-informed policy frameworks.
• Economically and politically marginalised communities: Experimentation and analysis.
• Decision-making processes for setting social and climate goals as well as adaptation policies.
• Building moral economies: The behavioural foundations of development experimental economics.
• Integral ecology: Novel entrepreneurial initiatives and political proposals.
• Meritocracy or how to legitimise socio-economic inequalities and contrasts redistribution.
• Equality of opportunities: Challenges to bridge the gap between research and policy domains.
• Understanding rational choice theory, its shortcomings, and implications for economic policy.
• Relating market laws to human behaviour: A robotic hand to support the invisible hand.
• Pandemics rarely affect all people equally: Health as a global public good.
• Behavioural science and public policy for sustainability and human development.
• Sustainability-related disclosures for benchmarks: Tips for creating more sustainable ventures.
• Making the best decisions during pandemic crises: Why we need more than following the science.
• The potential for social mobility: Today’s inequalities in economic and social outcomes.
• Meritocracy as social inequality: A technocratic vision of the organisation of society and economy.
• Social responsibility beyond the invisible hand: Economic value chain and social value chain.
• Working for people and needs: Algorithms, economic justice, and digital commons.
• Resting on the same fatal assumptions: Rational and behavioural theories of the market.
• Measuring environmental and socio-economic impacts of ethical versus policy decisions.
• The uselessness of 'dismal science' in addressing contemporary issues and improving human life.
• Non-linear complexity theory: What have economists learned about valuing social relations?
• Knowledge base for taking action for the Sustainable Development Goals: Theory and policy.
• A commitment to promoting peace and conflict resolution through education and research.
• Ethics, game theory and laboratory experiments: Studying efficiency and equity.
• Competitive vs. cooperative individuals and moral principles of cooperation.
• Building capabilities: The social economy as a novel paradigm for human development.
• Regional economic diversity: Incorporating ethics into applied economic analysis.
• Behavioural ethics and teaching ethical decision-making: The role of personal accountability.
• Alice in wonderland: The environment as a well-ordered setting with occasional disturbances.
• Normative decision-making: balancing values, ethical principles, and societal objectives.
• Personalised rather than standardised life: Good enough rather than the best possible decision.

Distilling several decades of micro and macro research in ethics and economics, EDME offers a distinctive insight into economic activity, business models, and social change, revealing social actions and underlying social structures. By decoding the underlying meanings behind production, consumption, asset transfer, finance, and technologies, EDME aims to uncover the hidden aspects of these seemingly impersonal domains. EDME 2025 welcomes empirical, experimental, theoretical, epistemological, and methodological papers that address these or related questions from various disciplines and perspectives. Specifically, the subjects covered in this session encompass, among others, the methodology and epistemology of economics, the foundations of decision theory and game theory, economic theories of rationality, the nature of belief-based utility for understanding human behaviour, the role of philosophy and the analysis of economic thought, the claim of economic techniques in ethical theory, and ethical considerations in economics. Of course, we encourage papers on quantitative and qualitative methods addressing interdisciplinary research approaches for the complex and multifaceted ethical issues surrounding the social and cognitive sciences alongside the philosophy of economics. Papers will be judged on novelty, significance, correctness, and clarity.

Submissions are invited from early career researchers and more experienced experts and practitioners whose research transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries. Researchers whose studies explore the intersection between integral human development, sustainability, and scientific enquiries are particularly encouraged to apply.