Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Who Will Win the 2005 Nobel Prize in Economics?

On October 10th 2005, somebody will win the Nobel Prize in economics. I hope my wife wins it this year. Excluding my immediate family, I'd like to take a look at the possibility set. I apologize if I excluded you from this elite list.

1. Nobel prize in environmental economics to Weitzman, Nordhaus

2. Nobel prize in trade theory to Bhagwatti and Dixit

3. Nobel prize in President Bush praising to Krugman and David Brooks

4. Nobel prize in behavioral stuff to Richard Thaler

5. Nobel prize in contracts to Hart, Holmstrom, and Oliver Williamson

6. Nobel prize in development economics to Dasgupta and Deaton

7. Nobel prize in finance to Fama

8. Nobel Price in mechanism design to Milgrom, Myerson and Maskin

9. Nobel prize in family economics to Mincer and Pollak

10. Prize in Political Economy to Alesina, Persson and Tabellini

11. Prize in Modern Macro to Barro and Sargent

Since last year's prize went to macro guys, I don't see how this field can be recognized again so soon. Personally my favorites in this list are 1,9,2.


Econblogger said...

Oops, you got your wish for #9 already, in 2000. (Shared with Daniel McFadden.)

Anonymous said...

why the diss at Krugman?

Pierce Wetter said...

I think Marketocracy should win for showing that the Market is _not_ efficient and that skill exists, but that's just me. (I work for them.)

Econblogger said...

Dissing Krugman? Politics, of course! His past economic work has been absolutely seminal though. The increasing returns "revolution" will definitely get Krugman and Roemer Nobel prizes one day - perhaps shared?

__earth said...

3. Nobel prize in President Bush praising to Krugman and David Brooks

LOL! LOL! Good one.

Dr. Tufte said...

Roemer? You really think so? That seems to be a stretch to me

P.S. This is the name I use on Blogger to comment on my students' posts - you can see my personal blog at

Thomas Esmond Knox said...

Where can I put some money on William Baumol?

Anonymous said...


I am putting my money on a convex combination of 2 and 3 (with zero weight on Brooks).