UPDATE: Professor Gerard picks Paul Romer,  Professor Finkler picks Romer and William Baumol (both at Stern!), Professor Galambos still undecided, see comments for additional picks.

Anxiously Awaiting the Announcement

The 2012 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences will be announced on Monday 15 October, and once again all the world is riveted in anticipation. The riveted parties include those residing on Briggs 2nd, where we will once again sponsor a Predict the Nobel Prize Contest, with the winner to take home some fabulous prizes.

I don’t see any formal odds online yet, but Thomson Reuters provides some thoughts on Steven Ross for arbitrage pricing theory, Robert Schiller for work on market volatility, and Anthony Atkinson & Angus Deaton for the famous Atkinson & Deaton work on income, consumption, and well-being.

So, submit your pick to Prof Gerard prior to October 15, keeping in mind that the Nobel winner will not necessarily come from that draw (Of course, I’m still partial to Armen Alchian, and I have to believe Jerry Hausman will win sooner or later).  You can also post them in the comments, first come, first serve.


For further reading:

Robert J. Shiller 2003. “From Efficient Markets Theory to Behavioral Finance,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(1): 83–104.

Stephen A.  Ross, 2004 “Review of The New Financial Order by Shiller,” Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4): 1098–1101.

Angus Deaton 2008. “Income, Health, and Well-Being around the World: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(2): 53–72.


5 thoughts on “Predict the Economics Nobel Prize”

  1. I would pick Eugene Fama as well, but I picked him last year, and we know that didn’t work.

  2. No one is more deserving than Alchian. It would be nice if his colleagues and co-authors Harold Demsetz and Ben Klein were also recognized for their work, much of which, of course, inspired by Alchian.

  3. It is interesting to look at the Nobel Symposia on economics, because in the past, most of the time, the year following the symposium on a special field someone from that field won the Nobel:
    1990 symposium on contracts, 1991 Ronald Coase won;
    1993 Symposium on game theory, 1994 Nash and Harsaniy won;
    1999 symposium on economic transition, 2001 Stiglitz won;
    2001 symposium on behavioural, 2002 Kannehman and Smith;
    2008 symposium on organisation, 2009 Olstrom and Williamason win.

    Last symposium is 2012 on Growth and development, 2013 will probably be someone in that field …

  4. The Nobel Prize process is seriously contaminated by group think. A lot of Keynesians and other (absolutely!) confused people have got awards since this is the dominant school in the academia. Tinkering with small things is more likely to get a Nobel than the genius with capacity to step back and look at the bigger picture. Adam Smith would not have qualified for a Nobel had he been alive today.

    Armen Alchian should have received it ages ago, and also Harold Demsetz. And I believe that Deirdre McCloskey deserves one for her (ongoing) astonishing work on innovation and the serious errors of “standard” economics. Among others I’m biased towards Jagdish Bhagwati, Richard Easterlin and Timur Kuran.

Comments are closed.