Navigating catastrophes: Local but not global optimisation allows for macro-economic navigation of crises

Two aspects of modern economic theory have dominated the recent discussion on the state of the global economy: Crashes in financial markets and whether or not traditional notions of economic equilibrium have any validity. We have all seen the consequences of market crashes: plummeting share prices, businesses collapsing and considerable uncertainty throughout the global economy. This seems contrary to what might be expected of a system in equilibrium where growth dominates the relatively minor fluctuations in prices. Recent work from within economics as well as by physicists, psychologists and computational scientists has significantly improved our understanding of the more complex aspects of these systems. With this interdisciplinary approach in mind, a behavioural economics model of local optimisation is introduced and three general properties are proven. The first is that under very specific conditions local optimisation leads to a conventional macro-economic notion of a global equilibrium. The second is that if both global optimisation and economic growth are required then under very mild assumptions market catastrophes are an unavoidable consequence. Third, if only local optimisation and economic growth are required then there is sufficient parametric freedom for macro-economic policy makers to steer an economy around catastrophes without overtly disrupting local optimisation.