Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy
Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy (JEEP) is an international scholarly journal dedicated to publishing high-quality academic works that examine the philosophical, epistemological, ethical, historical, and theoretical foundations of economics and economic thought. The journal aims to provide a rigorous intellectual platform for scholars who critically explore how economic knowledge is formed, justified, interpreted, and applied in social, institutional, political, and moral contexts. The journal welcomes manuscripts that engage with fundamental questions concerning the nature of economic reasoning, the assumptions behind economic theories, the relationship between economics and society, and the philosophical foundations of economic systems, policies, and institutions. It encourages critical, conceptual, theoretical, historical, and interdisciplinary studies that contribute to a deeper understanding of economics beyond technical modeling and empirical measurement. The journal particularly supports works that address economic ideas in relation to justice, welfare, human behavior, rationality, capitalism, socialism, Islamic economics, institutionalism, development, public policy, governance, sustainability, and contemporary socio-economic transformation. Submissions may draw from philosophy, economics, political economy, sociology, history of economic thought, ethics, law, public policy, and related disciplines.
Articles
7 Documents
<![CDATA[The philosophy of neoliberal economics: Ideological foundations, critical contestations, and contemporary relevance ]]>
<![CDATA[Dimvy Rusefani Asetya]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): March 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i1.1917
<![CDATA[This opinion paper critically examines the philosophical underpinnings of neoliberal economics as an ideological project that has fundamentally restructured global political economy since the late twentieth century. Drawing on intellectual traditions spanning classical liberalism, Austrian economics, Chicago School monetarism, and poststructuralist critiques, the paper interrogates neoliberalism not merely as a policy framework but as a comprehensive philosophical worldview predicated upon the primacy of market rationality, the epistemological supremacy of price signals, the ontological centrality of the entrepreneurial self, and the subordination of political authority to economic imperatives. The paper argues that neoliberalism constitutes a coherent, if internally contested, philosophical system that has successfully redefined the parameters of legitimate political-economic thought. At the same time, it identifies fundamental contradictions within neoliberal philosophy—particularly its simultaneously naturalistic and constructivist character, its tension between individual freedom and structural coercion, and its epistemological overconfidence in market mechanisms as information processors. The paper concludes by assessing the implications of these contradictions for contemporary economic governance, with particular reference to emerging economies, and argues that a philosophically informed critique is essential for the development of viable post-neoliberal alternatives. This analysis carries significant relevance for researchers in business management, institutional economics, and public policy, particularly in the context of Global South economies navigating the legacies of neoliberal structural adjustment.]]>
<![CDATA[Economic philosophy in Indonesia's new Prabowo government: Pancasila economics, developmentalism, and neoliberal residues ]]>
<![CDATA[Safri Adriansyah]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): March 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i1.1918
<![CDATA[Indonesia's Prabowo Subianto administration has begun with an explicit claim that economic policy should be anchored in Pancasila, sovereignty, and an activist state role. This opinion article examines the economic philosophy implied by the early agenda and evaluates whether it represents neoliberal continuity, developmental statism, or a hybrid alternative. Using an Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRAD) structure, this article applies a critical conceptual review and document analysis to official policy texts, macroeconomic data, and peer-reviewed literature on neoliberalism, Pancasila economics, Indonesian developmentalism, oligarchy, and social investment. The findings indicate that the administration's philosophy is not a purely neoliberal project. Its central elements are state managerial authority, human capital welfare, economic sovereignty through resource downstreaming, and strategic asset mobilization through Danantara. However, neoliberal residues remain visible in investment discipline, global capital, performance metrics, asset optimization, and market-compatible instruments. Therefore, this article characterizes the new policy orientation as Pancasila developmentalism with neoliberal instruments. Its legitimacy depends on transparent fiscal rules, independent evaluation of the free nutritious meal program, strong governance of Danantara, conflict-of-interest safeguards, local participation, and ecological accountability. This article contributes a philosophical framework for assessing Indonesia's new economic direction and proposes criteria for judging its scholarly and policy credibility.]]>
<![CDATA[The economic philosophy of Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr: Ontological foundations, distributive justice, and the third way between Capitalism and Marxism ]]>
<![CDATA[Mochamad Dandi]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): March 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i1.1919
<![CDATA[This opinion paper undertakes a systematic philosophical analysis of the economic thought of Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr (1935-1980), the Iraqi Shia scholar whose foundational works Iqtisaduna (Our Economics) and al-Bank al-la Ribawi fi al-Islam (The Interest-Free Bank in Islam) constitute the most philosophically sophisticated attempt in twentieth-century Islamic thought to construct a comprehensive alternative economic doctrine grounded in Islamic jurisprudence and theology. Drawing on al-Sadr's own primary texts and their reception in both Islamic economic scholarship and comparative political economy, the paper examines the ontological, epistemological, normative, and institutional dimensions of his economic philosophy. It argues that al-Sadr's project is not merely a technical exercise in Islamic jurisprudence applied to economic problems but a fundamental philosophical intervention that challenges the metaphysical premises of both capitalism and Marxism, reconstitutes the concept of economic freedom within a framework of divine sovereignty (tawhid), and develops an original theory of distributive justice grounded in the doctrine of istikhlaf (vicegerency). The paper further examines al-Sadr's treatment of property, production, distribution, and the role of the state, before engaging critically with the principal objections raised against his framework—including concerns about internal consistency, practical implementability, and the adequacy of ijtihad as a mechanism for economic adaptation. The paper concludes by assessing the contemporary relevance of al-Sadr's philosophy for Islamic economic governance and its potential contribution to a pluralist global conversation about post-neoliberal economic alternatives, with particular attention to its implications for Muslim-majority economies such as Indonesia.]]>
<![CDATA[Epistemology, philosophy, and economics: Foundations, methodological pluralism, and the future of knowledge production in economic science ]]>
<![CDATA[Rifqi Aqil Asyrof]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): March 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i1.1920
<![CDATA[Economic science, despite its claim to status as the most mathematically formalised of the social sciences, rests on philosophical foundations whose neglect has produced recurrent intellectual and practical crises, from the methodological controversies of the late nineteenth century to the predictive failures surrounding the 2007–2008 global financial crisis and the present epistemic challenges of artificial intelligence and big data. Purpose: This article systematically examines the philosophical and epistemological foundations of economic inquiry to articulate a defensible framework of methodological pluralism appropriate to twenty-first-century economic science. This study employs a conceptual-analytical method, combined with a bibliometric description and comparative philosophical analysis. It surveys the principal epistemological schools that have shaped economic thought, maps methods to research questions, and develops a framework of epistemic virtues for contemporary research. Economic knowledge is best understood as plural, fallible, and value-laden, rather than singular, certain, and value-free. Different research questions warrant different methods, and the dominance of any single approach, whether deductive theorizing, econometric inference, or experimental methods, generates systematic blind spots. The findings argue for a pluralist epistemology that integrates deductive, empirical, interpretive, and historical methods and cultivates epistemic virtues, including ontological humility, methodological pluralism, value transparency, empirical responsiveness, and reflexive critique. A philosophically literate economics, attentive to its own foundations, is better positioned to address the complex policy challenges and emerging methodological possibilities of the contemporary moment, including emerging economies such as Indonesia. This study contributes to the growing literature on the philosophy of economics by integrating epistemological analysis with applied research design considerations.]]>
<![CDATA[Pancasila Economics as an indigenous development framework: Principles, institutional architecture, and empirical performance in Post-Reform Indonesia ]]>
<![CDATA[Naufal Fairuz Adryan]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026): March 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i1.1922
<![CDATA[Pancasila Economics (ekonomi Pancasila) represents Indonesia's constitutionally embedded indigenous economic doctrine, articulated most systematically by Mubyarto and rooted in the five philosophical principles of the national ideology: divine monotheism, just humanity, national unity, deliberative democracy, and social justice. Despite its constitutional authority and increasing scholarly interest in non-Western development paradigms, Pancasila Economics remains empirically underexamined as a coherent and distinct economic system. Methods: This article employs a mixed integrative approach combining systematic conceptual analysis of the Pancasila economic doctrine with secondary quantitative analysis of Indonesia's national economic performance data (2000–2023) drawn from BPS Statistics Indonesia, World Bank Development Indicators, and UNDP Human Development Reports. Regression analysis examines the relationship between institutional manifestations of Pancasila economic principles—cooperative sector share, social protection expenditure, state enterprise investment, distributional equity, and participatory planning—and human development outcomes (HDI). Results: Indonesia's economic trajectory demonstrates selective congruence with Pancasila principles: poverty reduction has been substantial (from 18.4% in 2000 to 9.4% in 2023), cooperative GDP share has grown from 3.2% to 5.1%, and HDI has improved from 0.622 to 0.718. Regression results indicate that cooperative GDP share (beta = 0.387, p < .001), social protection expenditure (beta = 0.294, p = .002), and distributional equity (beta = 0.421, p < .001) are significant positive predictors of HDI. Discussion: These findings suggest that institutional configurations consistent with Pancasila economic principles positively associate with human development outcomes, while simultaneously revealing persistent tensions between constitutional mandates and neoliberal policy imperatives. Conclusion: Pancasila Economics offers a philosophically coherent and empirically relevant indigenous development framework with implications for comparative political economy and post-neoliberal institutional design in Global South contexts.]]>
<![CDATA[Contending epistemic orders: A systematic review of the philosophical and epistemological foundations of contemporary Indonesian economic thought ]]>
<![CDATA[Cecep Bryan Firdaus]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): September 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i2.2259
<![CDATA[The philosophy of economics has rarely asked how economic knowledge is formed, justified and applied in a plural, Muslim-majority, post-authoritarian developing society, despite Indonesia's formative role in twentieth-century debates over the cultural scope of economic theory. This article systematically reviews contemporary scholarship on the philosophical and epistemological foundations of Indonesian economic thought. Following SPAR-4-SLR and PRISMA 2020, a Scopus-derived corpus of 55 records (retrieved 4 September 2026) was screened to 44 eligible studies, profiled descriptively and synthesised through critical interpretive synthesis around the concept of epistemic orders: socially sustained configurations of epistemic authority, anthropology of the economic agent, conception of the economic good and institutional carriers. Six orders structure the literature: constitutional–nationalist, Islamic–theological, customary–communal, technocratic–market, structural–institutionalist and juridical–procedural. Fifty-nine per cent of studies invoke two orders, and hybrid frameworks proliferate in halal governance and state-enterprise reform. The field is juridified: 17 of 44 studies appear in law journals and doctrinal analysis is the modal method, so that questions about economic truth are posed as questions about legal certainty. Warrants are methodologically segregated—quantitative evidence serves only the technocratic order, ethnography the customary order, doctrine the Islamic and juridical orders—so that hybridisation occurs at the level of concepts rather than evidence. The article offers the first systematic mapping of post-Reformasi Indonesian economic thought as an epistemological field, proposes a typology of inter-order interaction (subsumption, hybridisation, translation and contestation) and sets out a research agenda for a philosophy of economics attentive to plural orders of justification in the Global South. Keywords: philosophy of economics; epistemic pluralism; Pancasila economics; Islamic economics; legal pluralism; moral economy; Indonesia; systematic literature review]]>
<![CDATA[Connectivity as an economic idea: A critical conceptual review of neoliberalism, Chinese Statecraft and ASEAN hedging in Southeast Asia ]]>
<![CDATA[Sahara Putri Dahlan]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Economic Epistemology and Philosophy Vol. 1 No. 2 (2026): September 2026 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Privietlab ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.55942/jeep.v1i2.2264
<![CDATA["Connectivity" has become the organising objective of economic policy in Southeast Asia, invoked alike by China's Belt and Road Initiative, ASEAN's Master Plans on Connectivity, the European Union's Global Gateway and the Indo-Pacific strategies of the United States and its partners. This article asks what conception of the economy the idea presupposes, how its rival programmes embody rival economic philosophies, and what its epistemic and moral consequences are. A critical conceptual review is conducted on a documented corpus of 86 Scopus-indexed publications retrieved on 9 September 2026, spanning international political economy, development studies, regionalism, urban studies and the digital economy, read through the philosophy of economics, political discourse theory, infrastructure studies and moral economy. Connectivity performs three philosophical operations: an ontological one, which pictures the economy as flows across a friction-laden space in which every "gap" is a deficit; an epistemic one, which converts political choices into technical problems and renders the concept an empty signifier that any programme may fill; and a normative one, which presupposes that integration is good while lacking a theory of how its gains and harms are distributed. The Chinese state-led and the Western rule-based models are read as consequentialist statism and proceduralist liberalism respectively, both variegated in practice by developmental-state legacies and zoning technologies. ASEAN hedging is reconstructed as a pragmatist epistemology of economic statecraft under Knightian uncertainty. The knowledge of infrastructural risk is shown to be co-produced by social forces rather than measured, and the harms of connectivity to fall on those least connected to its decisions. The article brings infrastructure into the philosophy of economics, offers the first systematic philosophical reading of the Southeast Asian connectivity literature, and proposes a research agenda for a normative and epistemological theory of economic integration. Keywords: connectivity; philosophy of economics; neoliberalism; Belt and Road Initiative; hedging; ASEAN; infrastructure; moral economy; political economy]]>
