Environmental and Urban Economics

Most economists have fond memories of applied labor classes where the professor would teach the following detective puzzle. If a 45 year old in calendar year 2008 buys a Prius, what have we learned about the relative importance of birth cohort effects, calendar year effects versus age effects in determining car demand?

The answer to the riddle revolves around the following exciting arithmetic.

In 2008, a person who is 45 years old was born in 1963. So there are 3 different factors potentially driving behavior;

1. Being 45 years old (the age effect)

2. Having been born in 1963 (the birth cohort effect)

3. Living in 2008 (the calendar year effect) ---

The trouble is the identity that 2008 - 45 = 1963.

so at a point in time you can't tease out all 3 effects' impact.

Urban Economists continue to debate the future of the Rust Belt. Ed Glaeser has earned much praise from upstate New Yorkers for his "kind words" about Buffalo's fate. See http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_buffalo_ny.html.

Other economists have also highlighted the challenges that cold Rust Belt cities face. Bruce Sacerdote paper on the Rust Belt

The New York Times is becoming a more optimistic newspaper. Perhaps the end isn't near afterall.

Can the old learn from the young? As a younger man, I worked at Columbia University and had the opportunity to teach some very gifted students. This one student makes some good points.

Urban green space is a scarce commodity. At some expense, Boston has increased its supply. Was this money well spent? Who are the real winners from this public investment? The city is "greener" and a little less congested because of it. Center city land owners will enjoy a windfall and tourists may have a better walk before they go to Legal Seafood for lunch. Myself? I moved from Boston to Los Angeles and I will only gain from the "existence value".

I entered the University of Chicago in 1988 intending to become a macroeconomist. I quickly transitioned to another field of study called applied micro. But, I always respected the Chicago Macro Stars. Starting today, I have a new favorite macro-economist. Forget my Chicago days of Lucas and Prescott, Charles Plosser is back. We were taught his real business cycle stuff and those Rochester hits are still somewhere in the back of my mind.

Will your grandchildren have a higher quality of life than we do? Most economists would say yes to this. Would most ecologists say no? Are the two answers linked? If the "capitalist" economists help to convince the rest of the world "don't worry, be happy" does this raise the likelihood of ecological disaster? Here is a website that blames the Chicago Boys for some of the challenges we face.

In a global deal on limiting greenhouse gases, we need all the major nations (including China, India and the U.S) to participate.

It appears that the media is devoting more and more attention to environmental issues. What has been displaced? Flattering articles about economists and the fascinating lives we live? Or perhaps another article about Bernanke's Keynesian adventures or Larry Summers' charm?

Here are two interesting environmental pieces in the news.

1. Michael Specter’s piece ‘Big Foot’ from the February 25th issue of The New Yorker on newsstands tomorrow.

UCLA's Westwood is usually a pretty intellectual place. But as I walked back to my house close to Westwood Village, I walked past a bar sign claiming that Playboy Playmates were there celebrating the NBA All-Star Game. There was also a radio station's truck parked outside and a guy who sounded a like a DJ yelling into cell phone in a radio voice kind of way that the was the bar to be at this afternoon. Since I am a social scientist, I wanted to see what was going on in there.