jordan pulse -

“Just as an irrational consumer squanders their income, irrational states squander their opportunities for prosperity.”

By Prof. Khalid Wassef Al-Wazani

Professor of Economics and Public Policy

Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government

One of the most fundamental assumptions introduced by economic theory to ensure sound and effective decision‑making by individuals, institutions, and states is the assumption of rationality. 

This premise holds that economic decisions taken by economic actors—whether individuals, corporations, or governments—are based on rational judgment aimed at maximizing their objectives. 

However, economic thought evolved significantly during the second half of the twentieth century, revealing the complexities and challenges that often surround economic decision‑making. 

These developments showed that the application of the theory of rationality in its pure theoretical form can face practical limitations. 

Yet despite these challenges, there remains broad academic consensus that rationality—however constrained by real‑world conditions—should ultimately guide decisions toward maximizing benefits and ensuring the optimal use of resources.

Within the context of economic rationality, the contribution of the economist and decision scientist Herbert Simon, Nobel Laureate in Economics, stands out prominently. Simon introduced the concept of “bounded rationality,” arguing that rational decision‑making requires an environment where complete information and sufficient cognitive capacity are available. 

In reality, however, individuals, institutions, and even states rarely possess such ideal conditions. As a result, decision‑makers often settle for what Simon described as “satisficing” decisions—choices that are merely satisfactory, popular, or ideologically driven rather than truly optimal or beneficial.

Later, economist and psychologist Daniel Kahneman deepened this understanding through his groundbreaking work in behavioral economics. 

Kahneman demonstrated that decisions are frequently influenced by cognitive and emotional biases. These biases may be ideological, political, social, or cultural in nature, often diverting decisions away from rational economic logic. Behavioral economics further distinguishes between two decision‑making processes: a fast, intuitive system and a slow, analytical system. As Kahneman famously noted, the human mind does not always operate according to strict economic logic; it is often shaped by intuition and rapid impressions.

The essential point is that the theory of rationality applies not only to individual economic decisions but equally to public policy. 

Governments and states, like individuals, can adopt irrational policies that harm both the macroeconomy and the welfare of their populations. The challenge is that irrationality at the level of the state has far broader and deeper consequences. 

It can affect investment flows, trade relations, and the overall monetary and financial stability of an entire country. Rational economic policy requires maintaining a delicate balance between national interests and stability at the domestic, regional, and international levels. 

Public policies should focus on strengthening confidence in the national economy, attracting investment, expanding trade opportunities, and creating a stable environment that enhances quality of life and societal well‑being. In contrast, irrational policies push economies toward isolation, increase geopolitical risk, raise the cost of investment and financing, and destabilize the monetary foundations of the state—causing the purchasing power of individual incomes to evaporate almost overnight. 

When irrational policies extend into the political and military spheres, the first casualties are often the climate for investment and trade, particularly when persistent escalation and the creation of regional flashpoints become the norm. 

Under such circumstances, rational decision‑making in both economic and political policy becomes not merely a theoretical or ethical principle but a fundamental prerequisite for stability and development.

States that manage their policies with balance and rational judgment are better able to build broader economic partnerships and allocate their resources in ways that benefit their societies. By contrast, states that drift toward irrational decision‑making often find themselves paying the economic price of those choices sooner rather than later.

Perhaps the most important lesson from contemporary economic experience—and a lesson currently visible in our region amid tensions involving Iran and its attacks against neighboring states—is that irrational decisions inevitably damage economic interests, deepen isolation, and expose economies to both immediate and long‑term risks. True economic strength is not built through escalation and conflict, but through rational management of resources and international relations.

At its core, economics is the science of rational choices under conditions of scarcity. 

When rationality disappears from public policy, decisions become a burden on the economy rather than a source of strength.

In the end, just as an irrational consumer may squander their income and resources, an irrational state may squander its opportunities for prosperity and stability. Rational decision‑making—whether at the level of individuals or governments—remains one of the most essential conditions for economic success in an increasingly complex and challenging world.

One of the guiding principles of governance in the United Arab Emirates is that “politics should serve the economy.” This principle reflects a commitment to rational policymaking aimed at achieving the highest levels of quality of life and societal well‑being.

Prof. Khalid W. Al Wazani