Please click here to sign this letter. Frequently Asked Questions and More resources. Mark Ramseyer. But the brothel owner did in fact deceive Osaki, and even if the situation were as the article describes, the article is arguing that a ten-year-old is able to consent to become a sex worker. By attempting to argue that the brutal conditions endured by these young women and girls can be understood using a game-theoretic approach, the article brings both the journal and the profession of economics into disrepute.
We are writing this letter to the community of economists and beyond, rather than following the usual practice of writing a rebuttal to the journal, because we believe that this article goes well beyond mere academic failure or malpractice in its breach of academic standards, integrity, and ethics. The author is using economicsβmore specifically game theory and law and economicsβas a cover to legitimize horrific atrocities.
We believe that educating ourselves and our colleagues is first and most important, and that any responsible scholar, after understanding the facts, would condemn the article and also call for its retraction. That said, we want to be very clear about our concern with this article. We are firmly committed to academic freedom.
As economists, our chief concern is that the article attempts to use the language of economics to make historical claims that have no basis in evidence. Our demand is that the editors of the International Review of Law and Economics take all necessary corrective measures to address the concerns expressed below and explain their decision-making process and scholarly standards.
We believe that our discipline must uphold academic and ethical standards. We are therefore asking our colleagues to sign and circulate this letter. These young women and girls, most of whom were of ages between eleven and twenty , came originally from areas including Korea, China, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and the Netherlands.
