Lets start with a definition from Investopedia - Investopedia explains Microeconomics: "The field of economics is broken down into two distinct areas of study: microeconomics and macroeconomics. Microeconomics looks at the smaller picture and focuses more on basic theories of supply and demand and how individual businesses decide how much of something to produce and how much to charge for it. People who have any desire to start their own business or who want to learn the rationale behind the pricing of particular products and services would be more interested in this area.



Macroeconomics, on the other hand, looks at the big picture (hence "macro"). It focuses on the national economy as a whole and provides a basic knowledge of how things work in the business world. For example, people who study this branch of economics would be able to interpret the latest Gross Domestic Product figures or explain why a 6% rate of unemployment is not necessarily a bad thing. Thus, for an overall perspective of how the entire economy works, you need to have an understanding of economics at both the micro and macro levels."



If you don't agree on a definition then that is a profound source of trouble. The subject is vast, the nuances overwhelming, the potential for ideological, geopolitical, geographic anomalies and schisms are huge.



Professor Seabright, if you think you can get a million strong herd of economists all heading in the same direction you are quite frankly P1$$1ng in the wind.



You are a very brave man doomed to failure.



You should develop several theories based on empirical analysis for particular markets, countries, regimes and levels of corruption.



Hope this helps. C'est La Vie