Nomenclature of economics as 'orthoniti' revisited

The genesis of the contemplation of writing this article dates to December 2001 at a dinner gathering at Kurmitola Army Club. While introducing me to his friends Col (Rtd) Jafar Imam (Bir Bikram) said, "This is my brother-in-law, Dr Abdullah Dewan who did his Ph.D. in 'orthoniti'." With a furtive smile I retorted, "I did my Ph.D. in economics not in 'orthoniti' per se." His friends asked, "What's the difference?" I clarified by saying that I took monetary economics ('orthoniti') courses and other economics classes to meet my course requirements but the degree is not in which is one of several fields in economics.

Why such a confusion? I have always been mildly conflicted by the Bangla term 'orthoniti' ever since. As recently as two weeks ago, I talked to my friend Humayun Kabir about this conceptual dilemma and the outcome of our conversations is this article.

The term 'economics' in Bangla is 'orthoniti' and in Hindi, 'orthashastra'. And similarly, monetary policy in Bangla is 'mudraniti,' 'fiscal policy' is 'rajashawniti'. 'Ortho' in English is money. It is also called 'mudra.' Hence following that rationale, monetary policy can be called 'orthoniti' or 'mudraniti,' or 'takaniti.' The pertinent question that follows is why we have termed 'economics' as 'orthoniti'.

Another conflicting issue that begged our attention is tax policy. The term tax in Bangla is called 'kaar'or 'khazna'. But then why do we use the term 'rajashaw'? When we do not live in a Kingdom, why then the fiscal policy is called 'rajashawniti'. Fiscal policy involves both tax policy and spending policy of a government - not just tax policy alone. In the same of both correctively and consistency we can say that economic policy involves both monetary policy and fiscal policy.

As we all know that economics is the study and understanding of (a) what to produce in the economy; (b) how much to produce; (c) for whom to produce; (d) what prices to charge for goods and services that are produced; and (e) are the methods of production and distribution -- given the available resources -- are efficient (absence of waste)? These activities involve some form of coordinated interactions between the government, the private sector, and the mighty consumers. We cannot unarguably claim that the term 'orthoniti' incorporates or evokes all these aspects of the modern economy? This piece is an attempt to elucidate what we thought would be appropriate by being academically pragmatic, commonly perceptible, and easily interpretable.

Economics is an interdisciplinary field in social science that encompasses insights and understandings of many areas of social, political, and economic life of domestic and global citizens. Being an economist does not necessarily imply one has gained knowledge and expertise in all its branches. For example, a government's economic policies involve both monetary policy and fiscal policy designed to influence output, employment, and prices by changing the money supply, interest rate, tax and spending for the welfare of its citizens. Although monetary policy exclusively involves changing the money supply to change interest rate, fiscal policy also changes the money supply, albeit indirectly through debt monetisation which affects interest rates. Another example would be international trade policies (exports and imports) which affect the domestic economy in almost all aspects of our economic life.

At the risk of being platitudinous, we may remind the readers that the term 'economics' has its roots in Greek that was seamlessly stitched from two Greek words 'oikos', meaning "family, household, estate," and 'nomos' or "custom, law," which literally means "household management" or "management of the state." The field is broadly classified into two areas -- microeconomics vs macroeconomics. The term economics was first created or devised around 1870 and widely promoted and popularised by influential "neoclassical" economists such as Alfred Marshall as an alternative to the earlier nomenclature 'political economy' -- one that used to mean 'the economics of politics.'

The widely acclaimed writer Justin Wolfers recently pointed out that the discipline of economics barely existed 200 years ago. Today, it is arguably the king of the social sciences. In fact, over the last 200 years or so, economists have developed theories and methods and applied them to many non-monetary areas as diverse as criminal behaviour (economics of crime), sports (sports economics), real estate economics, gender economics, economics of education, law and economics and so on (see illustration in the Figure below). This was possible because economics is essentially about human choices and decision-making for desired outcomes for the overall welfare of all living organisms - meaning "anything that has life, consisting of cells, as its basic unit of organisation". Therefore, we can argue that by terming economics as 'orthoniti' or 'orhtoshastro' one leaves many important non-monetary areas of economics from an all-encompassing perspective of the much wider knowledge base.

The circular chart below shows some of the leading areas of the discipline of economics which do not have much to do with 'orthoniti'. The word 'orthoniti' falls short to fully represent what 'economics' is all about. As well it becomes confusing even if stretched to include many new areas of human activities that are non-monetary when we include all their essential elements.

Despite our unwavering efforts, we could not think of any befitting Bangla proxy term for 'economics' that will closely manifest all monetary and non-monetary aspects of the discipline in their roper perspectives. The term has evolved over time from political economy in the 1700s to today's globally acclaimed term 'economics'. Although the term had its roots in Greek Lexicon, it stands out -- by deliberate design or sheer happenstance -- as an acronym, manifesting eight unassailable factors that have constituted as an integral part of day-to-day human activities. For example: E = employment or employees (labour or workforce), C = Capital (machines and equipment, technology), O = output (real GDP), NO = nominal (price level), M = money, I = interest rate, C= consumption (consumer expenditures), S = savings. Hence the word ECONOMICS is constituted in which the first three letters represent real variables (inflations adjusted) and the last four represent nominal variables. This decomposition of the term may enable even the 5th graders to know what ECONOMICS deals with and may even stimulate their interest in the subject in later grade classes.

Once derogatorily dismissed as a dismal science by Scottish essayist, historian, and philosopher Thomas Carlyle in 1849, Economics, as articulated above, has expanded by leaps and bounds in numerous diverse areas of human activities over the last several centuries. Unfortunately, we are still stuck with outdated designations of subject names whose relevance dates to relics of long past. So, why not call 'spade a spade' and allow enriching Bangla vocabulary by calling economics simply 'economics' instead of 'orthoniti' while eliminating any confusion what economics all about is.

If we ever dare write an economics book entitled "Economics for Layman" we are contemplating to use the word 'economics' but not 'orthoniti'. The subject is already complicated and confusing enough and therefore, it may be more appropriate to integrate the word 'economics' in Bangla that encompasses all its essential features and connotations which the antic Bangla nomenclature 'orthoniti' does not live up to the reality of modern-day economics.

Dr Abdullah Dewan is Professor of Economics at Eastern Michigan University, USA, and Humayun Kabir is economist and former senior UN official living in Toronto, Canada. The authors would like to thank Ghulam Rahman, economist and former ACC Chairman, Govt of Bangladesh and D. Sayera Younus, Director of Research Department, Bangladesh Bank. for their insights and comments. [email protected]