Research

Peer-Reviewed Articles

• "The Ethics of Mergers and Acquisitions: Sharing the Epistemic Burden in Antitrust Regulation" (Forthcoming) Business Ethics Quarterly

  Mergers and acquisitions can reshape entire sectors, generating incredible wealth or destroying the livelihoods of thousands. And although there have been some ethical analyses of the practice, there has been little work dedicated to identifying the ethical obligations arising from the interplay between firms and regulators. Given that antitrust regulations exist to navigate the tradeoff between the social benefits and social harms resulting from mergers and acquisitions, there is an important investigatory process which allows regulators to assess the relevant risks. Because firms create the risk for social harms by initiating merger negotiations, they have an obligation to share the epistemic burden and provide regulators with curated information. Complementing this epistemic obligation are various prudential considerations as well as a downstream political obligation grounded in reciprocity that holds that firms should abstain from regulatory capture, allowing the regulators to maintain their institutional neutrality and legitimacy.

• "Why Are Microfoundations Irrelevant?" (2026) Philosophy of the Social Sciences [Online]

  Microfoundations have long been the subject of a methodological debate over how microeconomic and macroeconomic analysis are understood to relate to one another. Despite once being an important debate with profound consequences for how economics was practiced, changes in macroeconomics over the past forty years have made the debate vestigial and irrelevant for understanding, justifying, and criticizing modern mainstream macroeconomics. Specifically, macroeconomics has undergone a methodological convergence, making it methodologically indistinguishable from microeconomic analysis. For this reason, the debate should be reoriented away from ‘microfoundations’ and towards issues which are currently salient: aggregation and heterogeneity.

• "Darwinian Rational Expectations" (2022) Journal of Economic Methodology [Online]

  The rational expectations hypothesis holds that agents should be modeled as not making systematic forecasting errors and has become a central model-building principle of modern economics. The hypothesis is often justified on the grounds that it coheres with the general methodological principle of economic rationality. In this article, I propose a novel Darwinian market justification for rational expectations which does not require either structural knowledge or statistical learning, as is commonly required in the economic literature. Rather, this Darwinian market account reconceives rationality as a market level phenomenon instead of as an individualistic property.

• “Crisis Prices: The Ethics of Market Controls During a Global Pandemic” (2021) [With Ewan Kingston] Business Ethics Quarterly [Online and Open Access]

  SARS-CoV-2 has unleashed an unprecedented global crisis that has caused the demand for essential goods, such as medical and sanitation products, to soar while simultaneously disrupting the very supply chains that allow individuals and institutions to obtain those essential goods. This has resulted in stark price increases and accusations of price gouging. We survey the existing philosophical literature that examines price gouging and identify the key arguments for regulators permitting such behavior and for regulators restricting such behavior. We demonstrate how the existing accounts are designed for localized emergencies rather than global persistent crises such as the coronavirus pandemic. In light of this, we highlight an understudied justification for price gouging that is much more salient during global crises: incentivizing increased production of essential goods. Furthermore, we pinpoint three conditions that help determine whether authorities should restrict price gouging during the coronavirus pandemic and similar global crises.