Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1509.01526

The Principle of the Malevolent Hiding Hand; or, the Planning Fallacy Writ Large

Abstract

We identify and document a new principle of economic behavior: the principle of the Malevolent Hiding Hand. In a famous discussion, Albert Hirschman celebrated the Hiding Hand, which he saw as a benevolent mechanism by which unrealistically optimistic planners embark on unexpectedly challenging plans, only to be rescued by human ingenuity, which they could not anticipate, but which ultimately led to success, principally in the form of unexpectedly high net benefits. Studying eleven projects, Hirschman suggested that the Hiding Hand is a general phenomenon. But the Benevolent Hiding Hand has an evil twin, the Malevolent Hiding Hand, which blinds excessively optimistic planners not only to unexpectedly high costs but also to unexpectedly low net benefits. Studying a much larger sample than Hirschman did, we find that the Malevolent Hiding Hand is common and that the phenomenon that Hirschman identified is rare. This sobering finding suggests that Hirschman's phenomenon is a special case; it attests to the pervasiveness of the planning fallacy, writ very large. One implication involves the continuing need for unbiased cost-benefit analyses and other economic decision support tools; another is that such tools might sometimes prove unreliable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Bent Flyvbjerg, Cass R. Sunstein. 2015-09-04. The Principle of the Malevolent Hiding Hand; or, the Planning Fallacy Writ Large. https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.01526

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Computing Endogenous Transformations in Processing Networks: A Dynamic Calibration Approach

Understanding how supply chains endogenously transform requires a parametric model of processing networks with non-neutral substitution elasticities. While the Cascaded CES production function provides a rigorous framework, dynamically calibrating its structural parameters from time-series data constitutes a highly non-convex inverse optimization problem. Since enforcing strict microeconomic concavity renders standard monolithic approaches computationally intractable, we propose a novel structure-exploiting algorithm to bypass this limitation. By leveraging the physical upstreamness topology of the network, our hybrid heuristic effectively breaks the curse of dimensionality inherent in economywide processing networks. Applying this framework to U.S. time-series data, we provide a scalable computational engine to fully endogenize complex supply-chain transformations, ultimately uncovering the elastic origins of asymmetric macroeconomic tail risks.

econ.GN

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Screening Out the Needy: The Effects of SNAP Work Requirements

We examine the effectiveness of work requirements as a screening device in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Work requirements for "able-bodied adults without dependents" were suspended after the Great Recession and gradually reinstated across counties and states in the 2010s. Using linked administrative SNAP and employment data from five states and a triple-differences design, we find that work requirements reduce SNAP participation by seven percent without increasing labor supply and disproportionately screen out low-income individuals. We develop a welfare framework to interpret these results and find that the social costs of work requirements exceed budget savings.

econ.GN