Twenty-eight years ago, on this day, August 18th, 1997, ABC’s Four Corners exposed the “economic modelling” scam
“This model [ORANI-F] was used, with ABARE’s MENSA model, in the economic modelling undertaken for the ESD Working Groups (1991). Dixon, when interviewed by 4 Corners [ABC television 18.8.97.], stated that he only edited a paper for ABARE regarding MEGABARE and that he did not referee the model. Dixon claims that ABARE does not have the intellectual expertise needed to develop a model of the global economy to adequately test the changes in policy it purports to be able to do. Hence, Dixon is directing his criticism at ABARE, not the model.”
(Duncan, 1997:74)
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.
The broader context was that economic modelling had come to be a useful way – especially for the rich and well-connected – to support their positions on economic policymaking. The key anecdote here comes from Richard Denniss, of the Australia Institute. Writing in 2015, he recalled
My first job as an independent economic consultant was 20 years ago. I’d previously worked with other economists as part of a team but this was my first solo performance. I was a bit nervous.
After a brief phone call explaining what the client wanted, I spent days preparing for our first face-to-face meeting. When I had spent a few minutes outlining what I saw as the strengths and weaknesses of the possible methodological options, the client interrupted.
“Look, mate,” he said, “all I want is something about an inch thick. I want to walk into a meeting, slam it on the fucking table, and say, ‘According to my economic modelling …’”
The specific context was that in late 1997 the issue of economic modelling and climate change was super “hot” because the Howard Government was trying to convince the rest of the world to give Australia a free pass on emissions reductions (domestic, let alone all the fossil fuels Australia was exporting!). And so Four Corners was looking into who said/did what to whom.
What I think we can learn from this – it’s all kayfabe. Economic modelling is voodoo and bollocks, for the most part.
What happened next – the economic modelling kept getting used, because it works on its intended audience – none-too-bright and obedient politicians, and friendly journalists up against a deadline with pages to fill. Doesn’t matter if it’s kayfabe/bullshit, it fills the need in the short-term.
What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.
Also on this day:
August 18, 1975 – it’s gonna get hotter, not cooler, say scientists
August 18, 1996, Ex-CSIRO #climate boss shows he has lost the plot
