  Financial and economic history is strewn with bubbles and crashes, booms and
busts, crises and upheavals of all sorts. Understanding the origin of these
events is arguably one of the most important problems in economic theory. In
this paper, we review recent efforts to include heterogeneities and
interactions in models of decision. We argue that the Random Field Ising model
(RFIM) indeed provides a unifying framework to account for many collective
socio-economic phenomena that lead to sudden ruptures and crises. We discuss
different models that can capture potentially destabilising self-referential
feedback loops, induced either by herding, i.e. reference to peers, or
trending, i.e. reference to the past, and account for some of the phenomenology
missing in the standard models. We discuss some empirically testable
predictions of these models, for example robust signatures of RFIM-like herding
effects, or the logarithmic decay of spatial correlations of voting patterns.
One of the most striking result, inspired by statistical physics methods, is
that Adam Smith's invisible hand can badly fail at solving simple coordination
problems. We also insist on the issue of time-scales, that can be extremely
long in some cases, and prevent socially optimal equilibria to be reached. As a
theoretical challenge, the study of so-called "detailed-balance" violating
decision rules is needed to decide whether conclusions based on current models
(that all assume detailed-balance) are indeed robust and generic.
