I was delighted to wake up this morning and discover that I have yet another Nobel Laureate as a colleague.
Congratulations to Roger Myerson! (And also to Eric Maskin and Leo Hurwicz, who shared the prize.)
The prize was “for having laid the foundations of mechanism design theory.” Mechanism design formalizes ways of thinking about how a social planner, manager, or parent can set up rules so that all parties involved have the incentives to act in the way that the planner/manager/parent prefers. This Nobel is not for the idea that you can design incentives this way, but rather for coming up with ingenious proofs that simplify the task of proving that, indeed, all parties have the right incentives — a task that can turn out to be awfully difficult.
In addition to being great economists (see my last post about what it means if you win the Nobel when you are young — both Maskin and Myerson are under 60 years old), they are both incredibly kind and generous people. In fact, they may challenge George Akerlof for the title of nicest people to win the Economics Nobel.
I don’t know Hurwicz personally. I’m embarrassed to say I don’t even know his research, for that matter. He must be at least 90 years old.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Why does everyone call the Economics Nobel a Nobel Prize? It’s not! It’s an award from a bank, and it is disgusting that economics gets an award and entire fields of hard science do not. E.g. microbiology, which is tremendously important, does not receive its own award, so it is instead lumped in with medicine most years.
Why does everyone call the Economics Nobel a Nobel Prize? It’s not! It’s an award from a bank, and it is disgusting that economics gets an award and entire fields of hard science do not. E.g. microbiology, which is tremendously important, does not receive its own award, so it is instead lumped in with medicine most years.
Thanks for blogging on this, Prof. Levitt! It’s excellent to have someone in the field discuss the Nobel laureates’ contributions in greater depth than the press release…
Thanks for blogging on this, Prof. Levitt! It’s excellent to have someone in the field discuss the Nobel laureates’ contributions in greater depth than the press release…
I agree with David. The bank that awards this is parasitically linking themselves with real scientists. Economic science is an oxymoron. If it were a science, its results would be truly predictive. How can you slap robust mathematical models on the random brain farts of the little-educated typical consumer? Heck, economists can’t even agree on a usable definition of “money supply”!
I agree with David. The bank that awards this is parasitically linking themselves with real scientists. Economic science is an oxymoron. If it were a science, its results would be truly predictive. How can you slap robust mathematical models on the random brain farts of the little-educated typical consumer? Heck, economists can’t even agree on a usable definition of “money supply”!
David, “everyone” calls it a Nobel prize largely because that’s how the media reports it. I think most people know it was not one of the original prizes. I’m not sure why it matters one way or the other.
I’m sorry you feel it is “disgusting” that economics, of which greater understanding has helped to raise standards of living for billions, has its own prize while microbiology does not. I disagree with that assessment.
David, “everyone” calls it a Nobel prize largely because that’s how the media reports it. I think most people know it was not one of the original prizes. I’m not sure why it matters one way or the other.
I’m sorry you feel it is “disgusting” that economics, of which greater understanding has helped to raise standards of living for billions, has its own prize while microbiology does not. I disagree with that assessment.