International audienceWe critically survey explicit discussions of the narrativity of economic agents by economists. Narrativity broadly refers to the way humans construct and use stories, notably to define their personal identity. We borrow from debates outside of economics to provide the critical dimension of our survey. Most contributions on the narrativity of economic agents do not discuss one another. To establish communication , we suggest a structure of oppositions that characterize these contributions taken as a whole. These oppositions are notably characterized by three tensions: in terms of methodological attitudes ('scientism' vs. 'humanism'), of underlying theories of personal identity postulating the existence of a unique sense of self or not ('diachronicity' vs. 'episodicity') and of the normative implications of narrativity ('welfare-increasing' vs. 'welfare-decreasing'). The main goal is to clarify the structure of opposite positions within a more or less explicit debate about the identity of individuals in economics

This article examines the Vichy regime's place in the history of the development and institutionalization of the social sciences around the "Science of Man". The model of a unified social science was particularly championed by the French Foundation for the Study of Human Problems (or Carrel Foundation) under the leadership of the economist François Perroux. This institution was directly and substantially financed by the Vichy Regime. It was part of the long history of the emergence of social sciences in France and constituted an important break in the same process. This break was particularly beneficial to the alliance between traditionalists and modernists at the time, particular at the expense of Durkheimian sociology. The article sheds light on François Perroux's effort to discredit the Durkheimian tradition, both in his writings and in his way of organizing and thinking about the missions of the Carrel Foundation.

This paper aims to replicate the effect of a nudge on behavior (efficiency) and acceptability in a natural field experiment. The nudge in our study consists in setting zero sugars as the default level of sugar in hot drinksvending machines in a French university. We compared Campus A (default option set to 0 sugars) to Campus B (default option set to 3 sugars). We measured the efficiency of this default option by observing the level of sugar actually chosen by the participants, and we measured acceptability through a questionnaire. We hypothesized a high level of efficiency for the nudge and a higher acceptability in Campus A (default option set to 0 sugars) compared to Campus B (default option set to 3 sugars). Our results show that participants with the default option set to zero sugars (Campus A) consumed less sugar than those with the default option set to 3 sugars (Campus B). We also found a high level of acceptability on both campuses, though with no difference between Campus A (where the nudge was implemented) and Campus B (where a future nudge would be implemented). The discussion addresses the applied perspectives and ethical implications of these results.