Kenneth Arrow,
the grand old man of economics, died last month in Palo Alto,
California at the age of 95. He received the Nobel Prize for Economic
Sciences in 1971 at the age of 51, the youngest ever then or since. In
perhaps the same way that economics aspires to be a science, the prize
for economic sciences itself was instituted 67 years after the original
Nobel Prizes were first awarded, when the Swedish Central Bank made a
donation to the Nobel Foundation to sponsor a prize called the “Sveriges
Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel”. Alfred
Nobel’s will had only included chemistry, physics, literature, medicine
and peace.
One way to tell the story of contemporary economics is to tell it
through a Nobel prism. Of the 78 prize winners in economics so far, 28
are from the University of Chicago, Elinor Ostrom (2011) is the only
woman and Amartya Sen (1998) is the only developing-world economist.
Friedrich Hayek (1974), ever humble, said in his acceptance speech, “If I
had been consulted whether to establish a Nobel Prize in economics, I
should have decidedly advised against it. The prize confers on an
individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess.”
Precisely when the mathematization of economics began is a topic of some debate. In a widely read paper in the American Economic Review,
GĂ©rard Debreu (who received the Nobel Prize in 1983 for his general
theory of equilibrium), traces events that relate to this and dates it
sometime before World War II. I date this phenomenon to the writings of
Irving Fisher that began in the teens, almost 100 years ago. If stories
need characters, then Fisher would be a lead candidate for protagonist.
Fisher was an economist, statistician and inventor. A polymath, he had
one doctoral thesis adviser who was a theoretical physicist and another a
sociologist.
Fisher
wrote widely about monetary economics (he formulated the quantity
theory of money), debt deflation, intertemporal choice, theory of
interest and investment, price indexing, consumption taxes and nominal
versus real interest rates. He was an uber successful businessman, who
lost all his wealth in the stock market crash of 1929. Since Fisher’s
time, the pre-20th century social science emphasis has given way to an
emphasis on economics as mathematical physics. Many of the modern greats
in economics are mathematicians; Arrow, Debreu and John Nash, to name
but a few.
In
a 2011 survey that asked a question about which pre-20th century
economists other economists most respected and admired, the top five
names were Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Alfred Marshall, John Stuart Mill
and Karl Marx. The post-20th century names that rose to the top were
J.M. Keynes, Milton Friedman, Paul Samuelson, Hayek, Joseph Schumpeter,
Arrow and Ronald Coase. Those still alive from the latter list are
Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz.
Among
the young economists of today, several new threads of research suggest a
diversification away from mathematization. Jesse Shapiro, a behavioural
economist at Brown University, has written a famous paper on obesity,
in the mould of Gary Becker from the University of Chicago. Raj Chetty
from Stanford University works on public economics, and the so-called
“randomistas” of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT,
(because they use a technique called randomized control tests) led by
Esther Duflo and Amy Finkelstein work on development economics. Ivan
Werning, a macroeconomist from MIT, and Marc Melitz from Harvard
University, a trade economist, continue the mathematical tradition. More
lawyers, sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists and Big-Data
scientists may have to enter the field of economics if it is to return
to a social studies arena. Some believe that the era of Big Data will
permit economists to conduct the laboratory simulations to convert it
from pseudo-science to full science. Others believe that tomorrow’s
economics will be written (once again) in prose and not equations.
The
sheer lack of Indians from India punching at or above their weight in
economics points to access to universities outside for the best Indian
students and the paucity of quality in our own higher-education
institutions. For economists from India, the story has not yet begun.
P.S.
“The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look
respectable,” said John Kenneth Galbraith, economist and former US
ambassador to India.
No comments:
Post a Comment