I am really pleased–elated really–about the naming of Ostrom and Williamson for the Nobel Prize in Economics. The two of them are real leaders in the development of the New Institutional Economics. Both have already had important and profound impacts on the study of law and economics and I hope that this will raise interest in their work to an even higher level.
Martinned says:
Or, as I would asked one of my colleagues just now: Who else do you give it to in the middle of an enormous recession that is apparently the fault of economists? Whatever may be wrong with the work of Williamson and/or Ostrom, I don’t see how they could be blamed for this SNAFU.
October 12, 2009, 9:30 amblcjr says:
Arguably, Williamson should have received this along with Douglass North 16 years ago.
Martinned,
Exactly how is this recession the fault of economists? All economists? If not all, then should you have an adjective or descriptor labeling the kind of economists to blame?
From where I sit, the recession should be blamed on (some) politicians. They may have had some economist enablers, but those should probably be singled out for specific mention, rather than blame the whole field.
October 12, 2009, 10:14 amMartinned says:
@blcjr: The idea was that the word “apparently” would clue the reader in that there was a degree of irony in my statement. Being an economist myself, I don’t think I’m to blame. I do, however, think that we need to rethink a few things about our area of study, like Posner sr. is doing in the Atlantic, for example:
If you think about what sub-fields of economics should get additional attention in response to this crisis, you end up with Minsky and with Institutional Economics, or even the wider field of heterodox economics. So this Nobel makes sense.
October 12, 2009, 11:00 amTim says:
I think it’s fair to point out, especially here where Obama jokes fly…that this isn’t a Nobel Prize…
Yglesias:… Oliver Williamson and Elinor Ostrom share the Swedish Central Bank Prize for Economics in Honor of Alfred Nobel. Alex Tabarrok explains Ostrom’s work and Paul Krugman tells you about Williamson. Osrtom is the first woman to win the prize and is also noteworthy for being a political scientist rather than an economist. Robert Shiller tells The New York Times that this is “part of the merging of the social sciences.”
Meanwhile, I would note that the Sveriges Riksbank itself deserves some kind of prize for ability to get people to call its economics prize “the Nobel Prize.” Real Nobel Prizes are prizes awarded according to the endowment that Alfred Nobel set up. There are, of course, lots of other prizes in the world set up by other people. One such prize is this economics prize that the Swedish Central Bank decided to give out. But only the Swedish Central Bank prize has succeeded in convincing people that it should be referred to as a “Nobel Prize” despite having no connection to Alfred Nobel or his prizes. Impressive work and yet another example of the impressively high-performing public sector institutions that make the Swedish social model work.
October 12, 2009, 1:52 pm