Transparency

Trust should be earned

Economic questions are often argued over. The same figures can be read in different ways, forecasts depend on what is assumed, and reasonable people disagree about what should be done.

So being open is not an optional extra for Equinomics. It is part of how the project should work.

How we handle evidence

1. Evidence and sources

   Wherever we practically can, important claims, charts and calculations will link to the sources behind them. We will also make clear which of these you are looking at:

   • Established data: figures that have been measured and published, such as official statistics.
   • Estimates and modelling: figures worked out from data, using assumptions.
   • Interpretation: what the figures appear to mean.
   • Opinion: a view about what should be done.
   • Projections and scenarios: what might happen in future, or what would happen if something changed.

   Where the evidence is uncertain, or serious people disagree, we will say so.

2. Methods and assumptions

   Interactive tools can make complicated ideas easier to understand. They can also hide the assumptions built into them.

   We intend to publish enough about our methods for you to see how the important calculations were done, what was assumed, and where the limits are.

3. Corrections

   Mistakes should be put right openly, not quietly ignored.

   As Equinomics develops, we intend to keep a simple way for anyone to report a mistake in our facts or our methods, and to correct it where needed.

How we stay independent

1. Political independence

   Equinomics is not affiliated with any political party.

   The project does have values: prosperity that is widely shared, a fair chance to get on, policy based on evidence, openness, and the importance of living standards.

   Holding those values does not mean pretending that every economic question has one answer decided in advance. We want to look fairly at the evidence, the arguments and the trade-offs, including the serious objections to ideas we discuss.

2. Funding and editorial independence

   Funding should support the work, not buy its conclusions.

   We intend to say who our significant funders are, for the organisation and for individual projects, and to make clear when a piece of work has been paid for or supported by an outside organisation.

   Funders and partners may offer expertise, ideas and constructive challenge. They should not get a hidden say over what we publish in return for their money.

3. Conflicts of interest

   A conflict of interest is when someone involved in a piece of work has something to gain or lose from what it says. Where that could reasonably affect how our work is seen, it should be declared.