Which of the following statements is a normative as opposed to a positive economic statement

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Economists frequently distinguish between 'positive' and 'normative' economics. Positive economics is concerned with the development and testing of positive statements about the world that are objective and verifiable. Normative statements derive from an opinion or a point of view. Thus the words 'should', 'ought to' or 'it is better to' frequently occur. The validity of normative statements can never be tested. Positive statements, on the other hand, can be tested, at least in theory, if not always in practice.

For anyone working in a management position it is helpful to distinguish between positive and normative statements. Managers and the people they work with, or are advised by, are likely to make liberal use of both, although normative statements may sometimes be disguised as positive statements. Whilst both types of statement may deserve attention, better management decisions are likely to result when the distinction between them is recognised.

It is often possible to rephrase normative statements in such a way that they become positive ones. For example, the normative statement 'the subsidies of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) should be removed' could be rephrased as the positive statement 'removing CAP subsidies will raise farm prices in developing countries'. The validity of the latter statement could, in theory, be tested.

Whether or not raising farm prices in developing countries is a good thing is another question. To say that 'raising farm prices in developing countries is a good thing' is a normative statement. On the other hand, the assertion that 'raising farm prices in developing countries will improve rural incomes in those countries' is a positive statement. Why? Because, again, it could, in theory, be tested. It does not say that rural incomes in developing countries ought to be raised, just that higher farm prices will have that effect.

To say that rural incomes should be raised is a normative statement, which you may well agree with, especially if you live and work in the rural areas of a developing country, or believe that increasing rural incomes is the best way to reduce poverty. On the other hand, if you live in the city of a developing country and believe that the removal of CAP subsidies will raise food prices, or if you are an EU food producer dependent upon CAP subsidies, you may feel differently about this - you may be less keen on raising rural incomes in developing countries, unless other ways can be found of achieving it.

You will notice that positive statements can often be broken down into a cause and an effect. Whether the effect is desirable or not is a normative question that will depend upon the subjective opinion of those affected. Economists practising positive economics can help analyse the effects in greater detail by breaking them down into positive and testable statements in the way we have done above. They can advise policy-makers in government, business, and other organisations both on the effects of specific policies and on the specific policies that need to be implemented in order to achieve desired effects. However, it is ultimately politicians and managers, and the people that empower them, that decide - on the basis of normative judgements - what is 'desirable' and what is not.

It is important to realise that economists practising positive economics do, however, make value judgements. Any analysis involves an element of subjectivity. In the first place, even what to analyse and how to analyse it often depends upon the subjective views of the analyst regarding what is, and what is not, important. Economic decisions have many different effects and it is rarely possible to examine them all in detail.

Indeed, whether to examine a problem from an economic perspective at all, or whether to focus instead on alternative perspectives, such as those provided by the disciplines of sociology, biology, or political science, depends in large part on normative/subjective views of the world.

Positive economics and normative economics are two standard branches of modern economics. Positive economics describes and explains various economic phenomena, while normative economics focuses on the value of economic fairness or what the economy should be.

To put it simply, positive economics is called the "what is" branch of economics. Normative economics, on the other hand, is considered the branch of economics that tries to determine the desirability of different economic programs and conditions by asking what "should" or what "ought" to be.

Positive economics describes and explains various economic phenomena.
Normative economics focuses on the value of economic fairness, or what the economy "should be" or "ought to be."
While positive economics is based on fact and cannot be approved or disapproved, normative economics is based on value judgments.
Most public policy is based on a combination of both positive and normative economics.

Positive economics is a stream of economics that focuses on the description, quantification, and explanation of economic developments, expectations, and associated phenomena. It relies on objective data analysis, relevant facts, and associated figures. It attempts to establish any cause-and-effect relationships or behavioral associations which can help ascertain and test the development of economic theories.

Positive economics is objective and fact-based where the statements are precise, descriptive, and clearly measurable. These statements can be measured against tangible evidence or historical instances. There are no instances of approval-disapproval in positive economics.

Here's an example of a positive economic statement: "Government-provided healthcare increases public expenditures." This statement is fact-based and has no value judgment attached to it. Its validity can be proven (or disproven) by studying healthcare spending where governments provide healthcare.

Positive economics was popularized by the economist Milton Friedman, who said that economic science should objectively analyze data without any bias or agenda.

Normative economics focuses on value-based judgments aimed at improving economic development, investment projects, and the distribution of wealth. Its goal is to summarize the desirability (or lack thereof) of various economic developments, situations, and programs by asking what should happen or what ought to be.

Normative economics is subjective and value-based, originating from personal perspectives or opinions involved in the decision-making process. The statements of this type of economics are rigid and prescriptive in nature. They often sound political, which is why this economic branch is also called "what should be" or "what ought to be" economics.

An example of a normative economic statement is: "The government should provide basic healthcare to all citizens." As you can deduce from this statement, it is value-based, rooted in personal perspective, and satisfies the requirement of what "should" be.

Common observations indicate that discussions around public policies typically involve normative economic statements. A higher degree of disagreement persists in such discussions because neither party can clearly prove their correctness.

Though normative statements are generalized and subjective in nature, they act as the necessary channels for out-of-the-box thinking. Such opinions can form the foundation for any necessary changes that may have the potential to completely transform a particular project.

But normative economics cannot be the sole basis for decision-making on key economic fronts. Positive economics fills in for the objective angle that focuses on facts and cause-and-effect. Coupled with positive economics, normative economics may be useful in establishing, generating, and fulfilling new ideas and theories for different economic goals and perspectives.

A clear understanding of the difference between positive and normative economics may lead to better policy-making if policies are made based on a balanced mix of facts (positive economics) and opinions (normative economics). Nonetheless, numerous policies on issues ranging from international trade to welfare are at least partially based on normative economics.

Any economic agenda that promotes some sort of social or policy agenda could be said to be normative. For instance, arguing for a higher minimum wage for the benefit of workers would be an example of a normative argument, in that this argument is based on subjective values. However, an assertion that higher minimum wages would lead to a higher GDP would be considered positive economics.

A positive statement is one that can establish hypotheses that can be empirically tested. In contrast, a normative statement is instead based on opinion or subjective values.

Both types have their place, and on their own both also have flaws. Integrating positive and normative economic statements together is often required in order to create the policies of a country, region, industrial sector, institution, or business.