阅读权限22威望0 级论坛币1856 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验759 点帖子116精华0在线时间0 小时注册时间最后登录
经济学大虾
积分 116, 距离下一级还需 29 积分
权限: 自定义头衔
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡下一级可获得
道具: 匿名卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
grossman & helpman
载入中......
不管做什么事，只要我们纠缠如毒蛇，执着如怨鬼，事无不成！
阅读权限16威望0 级论坛币13 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验220 点帖子17精华0在线时间2 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 31, 距离下一级还需 14 积分
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡下一级可获得
道具: 显身卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
阅读权限16威望0 级论坛币76 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验458 点帖子16精华0在线时间11 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 27, 距离下一级还需 18 积分
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡下一级可获得
道具: 显身卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
咦?怎么知道的?
新手,多多指教....
阅读权限16威望0 级论坛币91 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验209 点帖子10精华0在线时间25 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 38, 距离下一级还需 7 积分
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡下一级可获得
道具: 显身卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
grossman & helpman
阅读权限22威望0 级论坛币1182 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验897 点帖子57精华0在线时间176 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 245, 距离下一级还需 15 积分
权限: 自定义头衔
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡, 匿名卡下一级可获得
权限: 签名中使用图片
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
Elhanan Helpman&&&& Gene M. Grossman
阅读权限28威望0 级论坛币27081 个学术水平17 点热心指数20 点信用等级7 点经验9315 点帖子453精华0在线时间369 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 1023, 距离下一级还需 352 积分
权限: 自定义头衔, 签名中使用图片, 隐身
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡, 匿名卡, 抢沙发下一级可获得
权限: 设置帖子权限道具: 提升卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
开心签到天数: 1 天连续签到: 1 天[LV.1]初来乍到
Who will win the Nobel Prize in economics this year?Greg Mankiw asks and .& One guess is William Nordhaus, for his concept of "green accounting."& An environmental prize is overdue but perhaps Nordhaus is too skeptical about stringent anti-global warming measures to get the appropriate reception in Stockholm.Another option is Eugene Fama, both for testing
for securities prices and for figuring out what is wrong with it.& You can imagine pairing his prize with either Richard Thaler (behavioral finance) or Kenneth French (Fama's co-author on many important papers).Or how about Oliver Williamson and/or Jean Tirole for principal-agent theory as applied to the business firm?I would offer the prize jointly to Anne Krueger, Jagdish Bhagwati, and Gordon Tullock for their work on rent-seeking, but that is not my prediction.& Readers, what do you think?Posted by Tyler Cowen on October 6, 2007 at 09:09 AM in
CommentsIt's about time Bengt Holmstrom's contribution to microeconomic theory gets recognized, much more than Oliver Williamson or Jean Tirole, in my opinion.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :33 AMI am not too familiar with the big names, But I hope Jagdish Bhagwati wins this time, He really deserves a Nobel Prize for his contributions to his field. Holmstrom too has done some amazing work. lets see!Posted by:
at Oct 6, :29 AMNaomi Klein and Joe Stieglitz, joint prize.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :22 AMWell, Stiglitz has already won, and if Naomi Klein and Econ Nobel ever reach the same sentence again, I'm becoming an artist.How about William Baumol? Tirole has a good shot, but he's still too young, isn't he? Peter Diamond, James Mirrlees, and Jerry Hausman are never mentioned, but they should be. Is Lionel McKenzie still alive?That said, if I were a betting man, I'd say Fama or Fama/Thaler, though I think behavioral economics is not important enough to deserve multiple Nobels in only a few years.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :19 AM"Well, Stiglitz has already won,"and so has Mirrlees!Posted by:
at Oct 6, :46 PMFor environment, theory of the firm and a lot more the octogenarian Keynesian Prof.Baumol is the right name.There is no meaning in giving prize to finance theorists-a narrow field.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :51 PMI'm surprised you have Jean Tirole & Oliver Williamson in the same price —— but it might make sense the way you put it. I remember the Coase-Williamson duo was hot the year Coase got it, so it might be that —— that would be a big boost for my advisor.Otherwise, William Baumol makes sense: whom with, if I may assume the price is not given to lone rangers?Maybe Fama: the association with Thaler would be an interesting sign, saying that science, or at least economics, is a debate.Is it me, or, apart from Tirole, none of these are hard-core neo-classicals?Maybe you are just considering that the balance shifts every year, this year winner won't be an unemployment or inflation specialist.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :34 PMSimilarly Anne Krueger doesnot deserve a prize.Krugman,Bhagvathi and Dixit are some deserving names.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :09 PMIt is very unfortunate that Armen Alchian and Harold Demsetz seem to be completely forgotten by the profession, as Jack Hirshleifer was - he would have definitely deserved the recognition.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :06 PMIt may be too soon for the folks at Nobel who seem to insist on waiting til you are older than the hills before you can win, but I nominate Paul Romer for (re)opening up research into the actual causes of growth. For too long the field of economics bizarrely treated "technology" as exogenous, with "exogenous" being a polite way of saying: We have no freaking clue what we are talking about.Since Romer is probably too young to win, I'd vote for Barro or Feldstein.How about the Nobel "Peace" Prize? I'll vomit if Al Gore wins it, he's an irresponsible rabble rouser who selectively uses the worst possible, least likely outcomes (conveniently without citation I might add, making it hard for otherwise lazy media folks to fact check him) and presents them as if they were facts to an uninitiated audience.I hereby move that the Nobel Peace Prize henceforth be restricted only to those who actually help bring about peace.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :52 PM/weblog/2007/10/and-the-sverige.htmlSee my post our
blogPosted by:
at Oct 6, :31 PMBill Nordhaus for "green accounting"? That honor would clearly have to be shared by Martin Weitzman.In any case, it seems much more likely that either or both -- together perhaps with Partha Dasgupta -- win for contributions to environmental economics in general.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :34 PMRichard Posner for his numerous contributions to the economic analysis of law.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :14 PMHalbert White.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :25 PMHalbert White.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :42 PMHalbert White.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :47 PMGordon Tullock - He, as much as James Buchanan contibuted to recognition of the Public Theory concept, and should have stood with him then. But, as noted, he may be doubly recognized for both that and "Rent-Seeking." Not to be overlooked is his co-authored "Calculus of Consent."A collection of his "Selected Works" (C.K. Rowley, Ed.) is available from Liberty Fund.And, another plus, he, like Adam Smith, is NOT an "economist."Incidentally, being of his generation, I was long through at U.Va. before he came, and was never his student, though I hope to have gained something from his works.Richard Posner's time will come.R. Richard SchweitzerPosted by:
at Oct 6, :06 PMIt should be noted that the "Economics Nobel" is not adjunct to the Nobel Peace Prize, having been separately established.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :30 PMI vote for Fama, because his work withstood (is that the right word?) the test of time the best. (Fair disclosure: I almost took his course at Chicago, and now wish I had).Posted by:
at Oct 6, :22 PMI would add Susan Rose Ackermann to Anne Krueger.Against Krueger is only her work at the much maligned IMF.I have quoted Tullock in a third of my published works but he is not seen as an economist.Still he would be my first choice beside Krueger and Ackermann.Tirole for his work on regulation.Williamson for his work in the theory of the firm could be seen as a follower not an innovator but he deserves it.Baumol for his work ranging from welfare economics to the hetherodox( The Baumol disesases)I agree with the Roemer option , but he coulb be 20 years or more late.Development economics was the fad in the 70s.A dark horse: Kahn. An economist who succed in the real worldPosted by:
at Oct 6, :05 PMI'd be more interested to know what Nobel Prizes you would take away. Say the top 5 economists who shouldn't have deserved the prize *when* the prize was awarded rather than in light of subsequent economic research.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :47 PMHere is a futures market for the prize:http://www.nobelpreisboerse.de/stocks.aspx?stc=6It looks like Prescott and Barro lead at this point.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :30 PMHow long will it take for anybody to point out that Prescott has already won?Posted by:
at Oct 6, :10 PMI'd like to see Janos Kornai finally win for explaining the basic flaw in socialist economic systems (soft budget constraints), but I don't believe he'll get it.In environmental economics, I agree with those who point out that the contributions of Weitzman, Dasgupta and Baumol have been more important than Nordhaus's.As long as we're nominating non-economists (Tullock and Posner), what about Elinor Ostrom. Her work on CPR regimes and institutional analysis is both important and influential.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :34 PMRichard Nelson, Nathan Rosenberg, and Paul David for their contributions to the economics of technological change. Posted by:
at Oct 6, :46 PMI think it should go to Muhammad Yunus. Microfinance: Practical. Field tested. Helps the poor.JohnPosted by:
at Oct 6, :33 PMI have made guesses in the past, some of which are in Tyler's list. I shall stick to commentingon fields. First of all, I doubt it will be macro, which rules out Barro et al. Why? Macro gotit last year. Phelps. So, no macro this year. While Fama or Fama and Thaler or Fama and Mandelbrotor Fama and French, or some combo of these will eventually get it, I seriously doubt finance will getit this year. Too damned many problems in the financial markets. I think the committee is gun shyafter giving it to Merton and Scholes, only to have LTCM blow up and nearly tank the world system.The only way that one would happen would be if Fama were paired with someone else who is not as bigof a tub thumper for the EMH. That just looks like garbage right now.While environmental has never gotten it, trade has not had it for a very long time. Some combo ofpeople out of there look very likely to me. I would also point out that Williamson is the mostcited economist of all time. The others mentioned by Tyler are all serious possibilities.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :48 PMI would have to vote for Dixit: I believe that he's due for one soon.Posted by:
at Oct 6, :49 PMMy favourite one from Mankiw's blog:"Brad Delong for his contributions to the blogosphere"Posted by:
at Oct 6, :32 PMCan someone direct me to a summary of Nordhaus' work?To what extent is Norhaus' work dependent on or related to Alex Hartick's?Many thanks.Posted by:
at Oct 7, :20 AMWistful thinking --- for Sam Peltzman. All the green accounting, one must wonder what offsetting behaviors might emerge in conjunction with the green revolution. Posted by: at Oct 7, :25 AMryan, I'm pretty sure that's not a futures market.Posted by:
at Oct 7, :18 AMWell, the contracts "pay" $1000 if the candidate wins the prize and $0 otherwise. Maybe you are referring to the fact that prizes and not money are at stake?Posted by:
at Oct 7, :34 AMLars HansenPosted by: phil at Oct 7, :32 PM"Here is a futures market for the prize:http://www.nobelpreisboerse.de/stocks.aspx?stc=6It looks like Prescott and Barro lead at this point."A closer look at the site seems to show it was last updated in October 2004, just before Prescott won. So it WAS a futures market. But isn't any longer.Posted by: Will at Oct 7, :47 PMYep. That's why I said "How long will it take for anybody to point out that Prescott has already won?"Posted by:
at Oct 7, :03 PM
Posted by:
at Oct 8, :37 AML.P. Hansen. He had the Ely lecture this year. But he might still be too young.Posted by:
at Oct 8, :27 AMWhy so little research on "rent-seeking" in cultural economics?Posted by:
at Oct 8, :31 AMWhy not the Nobel Prize to Alan Greenspan? Posted by:
at Oct 8, :59 AMSandy Grossman, and to the above comments that financial theorists, and for that matter empiricists, should not be considered I ask why not? Posted by:
at Oct 8, :54 PMI vote for Janos Kornai (soft budget contstrains).Posted by:
at Oct 8, :31 PMI vote for Janos Kornai (soft budget contstrains).Posted by:
at Oct 8, :00 PMGive it to Philip Mirowski for his work in the history of economic thought. No one has done more toward advancing our understanding of economics as a science -- and no field in the discipline has done more to advance our grasp of the significance of economics as a science and discipline. A history of economic ideas Nobel Prize is long overdue.Posted by:
at Oct 8, :21 PMWhat about Martin Feldstein-Barro for their work on Social Security? What about a R McKinnon/H Desoto/Rabushka Nobel for economic development issues? Or maybe a Nordhaus-Alesina Nobel for Political Business cycles? Or how about a Laffer-Barro-Feldstein nobel for tax-deficit issues (too late for Jude Wanniski). Of course, people would joke about a joint nobel for Supply Side economics and Ricardian equivalence, but that's nothing new since the Hayek-Myrdahl prize. That last one would be seen as political, but if they could give it to Stiglitz after he shilled for Clinton, why not Laffer? Posted by:
at Oct 8, :44 PMIn the past three years Americans have swept the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. It only takes three to make a pattern, which one may very easily be commencing.In previous publications the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has said the U.S. is a definite contender once again. They have good reason to believe so seeing as how there are two possible nominees who both work at Columbia University, Christopher Sims and Jagdish Bhagwati. Two Americans won the prize last year for pioneering the use of psychological and experimental economics in decision-making to make markets safer. Daniel Kahneman, based at Princeton, and Vernon L. Smith of George Mason University received the prizes. Also, in 2001 three Americans won the economics prize for advances in ways to analyze markets that can be applied to both developing and advanced economies. In Addition of the 51 people who have received the prize since it was first awarded in 1969, 34 have been from the United States. If history repeats itself, which it usually tends to do, the United States will bring home another golden medallion!Posted by:
at Oct 9, :32 AMMankiw and Hubbard, for their reckless Economic advice to President Bush and destroying American Economy. They deserve Nobel! No Economist has done so disservice to the Profession of Economics. So they must be awarded!Posted by:
at Oct 9, :14 AMD Mckenzie,Prof.Myrdal got his Nobel not for his development studies or institutional economics but for his early contributions in pure dynamic analysis through his pathbreaking Wicksellian reformulation in his great book "MONETARY EQUILIBRIUM".He was a pure macro-monetary theorist in his youtful period. Posted by:
at Oct 9, :06 AMD Mckenzie,Prof.Myrdal got his Nobel not for his development studies or institutional economics but for his early contributions in pure dynamic analysis through his pathbreaking Wicksellian reformulation in his great book "MONETARY EQUILIBRIUM".He was a pure macro-monetary theorist in his youtful period. Posted by:
at Oct 9, :05 AMYAIR MUNDLAK merits a Nobel in Econ.Posted by:
at Oct 9, :41 AMI can't believe the masturbation that is going on here. Most works cited failed in description as well as in policy on the type of things going on in the real world. Ask Bernanke about it...shame, shame, shame... Posted by:
at Oct 9, :57 PMHow about Thomas J. Sargent and Lars P. HansenPosted by:
at Oct 9, :26 PMProfessor Leif JohansenProfessor Peter DixionComputable General Equilibrium.Posted by: UQ at Oct 10, :14 AMkevin murphyPosted by: at Oct 10, :07 AMkevin murphyPosted by: at Oct 10, :37 AMHow about Milgrom and Roberts- or, indeed, the whole gang of 4, including Kreps and Wilson?Peter Diamond, who someone mentioned, is an extraordinary economist with contributions in many areas.Posted by:
at Oct 10, :10 AMMy money is on Tom Sargent. Quite likely joint with Sims.Posted by: mv at Oct 10, :57 PMWilliamson is due. I see places remarking that he's "the most highly cited economist," but the rankings never mention him. I suspect that's because the rankings are done within econ. journals, and that Williamson's "accomplishment" is either (1) erroneous or (2) counts all the non-econ literature. Surely, OEW has had an enormous impact in the law literature, business, and other social sciences. Whether that fact matters in Sweden is another matter... Posted by:
at Oct 10, :59 PMOne should take into acount the people on the committee when making these predictions: http://nobelprize.org/prize_awarders/economics/committee.htmlHere's the list:J&rgen Weibull (Chairman)A.O. Wallenberg Professor of EconomicsPeter Englund (Secretary)Professor of Banking and InsuranceLars Calmfors (Member) Professor of International EconomicsPer Krusell (Members)Professor of EconomicsKarl-Gustaf L&fgren (Members)Professor of EconomicsTimo Tir&svirta (Member) Professor of Economic StatisticsPosted by:
at Oct 10, :35 PMBeing quoted outside economics journals matters, see CoasePosted by:
at Oct 11, :38 AMHow about evolutionary/behavioral ecology?...the expansion of economics to non-humans. Several major figures are cited &12,000 times each, although outside economics journals. In its favor is that the theory actually works....plants and animals really do obey economic rules...all driven by natural selection haveing designed them. Economists are SO limited in what they think economics really is.Posted by: john at Oct 11, :45 AMArmen Alchian is David Henderson raises that missed opportunity each year. Personally, I'd like to see the Nobel committee give Michael Jensen a serious look. His agency paper w. the late Bill Meckling is one of the most-cited papers in financial economics. Jensen's contributions have been far-ranging & not limited to written publications. As a founding editor of the Journal of Financial Economics, he helped nurture & usher in high-quality empirical papers, papers that are about more than mere tweaking of an equation. He has also done the profession a huge service with his SSRN website. I am a friend of his but stand by my comments steadfastly. Posted by:
at Oct 12, :01 AMDick Nelson and Sid Winter. Not a prediction, just a recommendation.Posted by:
at Oct 12, :49 PMInteresting that Weibull is chair of the committee. If my recollection is correct, his Ph.D. is actually in math, not in econ. Wonder if that shifts weight more towards a Milgrom/Roberts/Krep/Wilson prize?Posted by:
at Oct 12, :02 PMPost a comment
阅读权限28威望0 级论坛币27081 个学术水平17 点热心指数20 点信用等级7 点经验9315 点帖子453精华0在线时间369 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 1023, 距离下一级还需 352 积分
权限: 自定义头衔, 签名中使用图片, 隐身
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡, 匿名卡, 抢沙发下一级可获得
权限: 设置帖子权限道具: 提升卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
开心签到天数: 1 天连续签到: 1 天[LV.1]初来乍到
诺贝尔经济学奖15日揭晓 英国博彩公司开出赌盘　　周云　　一向最难捉摸的诺贝尔经济学奖获得者要到10月15日才会揭晓，可以预见的是，研究房市疲软、市场震荡与全球失衡等流行议题的学者，都不会是本届的获得者，但专家与博彩业者仍然兴奋地开出各自的热门候选人名单与赌盘。　　最难预测的诺奖　　在诺贝尔奖预测方面，经济学奖花落谁家被历史证明是最让人捉摸不透的奖项之一。部分原因可能是诺贝尔经济学奖的评审小组向来都避开时下最流行的议题，而偏好已经发表15至20年的创新论述。　　“要预测简直是太难了。”《卧底经济学》的作者、英国《金融时报》专栏作家蒂姆·哈佛德表示评选委员会成员们经常耐心地等待时间来证明经济学理论的真伪。　　“社会科学的本质很难讲清楚。我们曾经奉若真理的东西，实践证明在现实社会中往往行不通。”哈佛德表示，“我们必须让时间来检验，看是否被广泛地接受和认同。”　　但是在追问之下，哈佛德则提出了这样的获奖可能性———全部获奖者都是美国人：他们是研究金融市场的法马(EugeneFama)，其效率市场理论主张金融市场能以高效率反映股价；研究政府支出与成长理论的巴罗(RobertBarro)以及主张用碳排放税替换京都议定书模式的诺德郝斯(WilliamNordhaus)。“诺德郝斯是研究全球变暖的重要科学家，”哈佛德说，“但是坦率地说，他们中任何人获奖的话，我都会感到非常惊奇。”　　此外值得注意的是，英国博彩业者立博公司(Ladbrokes)开出赌盘，法马赔率为1赔8，巴罗为1赔9。同为环境经济学家的达斯古塔与诺德郝斯，则都不在呼声最高的名单中。　　以色列经济学家埃尔赫南·赫尔普曼(ElhananHelpman)以及普林斯顿大学的格罗斯曼(GeneGrossman)赔率均为1赔5，是赌盘上最被看好的人选。斯坦福大学教授保罗·罗默(PaulRomer)，伦敦政治经济学院的皮萨瑞德(ChrisPissarides)，麻省理工学院的戴孟德(PeterDiamond)与克鲁曼(PaulKrugman)，以及普林斯顿大学的摩坦森(DaleMortensen)均为热门人选。　　偏爱经济学元老　　经济学奖可谓是诺贝尔奖家族的“后生”，事实上直到1968年它才被追加进去。比早在1901年就已设立的和平奖、文学奖、三大科学奖要晚了很多年。　　哈佛德说经济学奖近年来都被年老的经济学家夺得，因为根据评选规则该奖不能颁发给已经过世的人，而评委会则希望在经济学元老们的有生之年对他们的学术成就给予肯定。　　瑞典银行每年都会发布其对经济学奖得主名单的预测。该银行认为最有希望获得诺奖的是那些长达15至25年的创新研究。“相对年轻的，即使(在研究领域)成功，获奖的希望非常渺茫。”研究成果需要很长时间才能被社会慢慢接受。　　2001年 共同获得者之一约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨对此有切身体会。他们在上个世纪60和70年代进行了大量的研究工作，可是直到如今还有为数不少的人对此持不以为然的态度，认为市场并不一定总是可以反映完整的信息。“知识界对此分歧很大。”斯蒂格利茨说。　　就像他在获奖时曾经说过的那样，他希望向世人证明信息经济学代表了一种全新的理论框架。事实上1997年亚洲金融危机，网络经济泡沫的破灭，以及如今次级债危机都阐明了他理论的正确性。“今天经济学领域的很大一部分研究成果都是建立在这个新的框架之上的。”斯蒂格利茨说。　　当被问及谁最有可能问鼎此次经济学奖时，斯蒂格利茨认为他的印度裔研究同僚达斯古塔(ParthaDas-gupta)出线胜算颇大。达斯古塔研究环境经济学。不过，斯蒂格利茨强调，这纯属个人看法，不是在猜测奖落谁家。　　◇相关链接　　近年经济学奖得主及其成就　　2006年诺贝尔经济学奖颁给美国哥伦比亚大学教授、就业与增长理论的著名代表人物埃德蒙·菲尔普斯(EdmundS.Phelps)，以表彰他在加深人们对于通货膨胀和失业预期关系的理解方面所做的贡献。　　2005年诺贝尔经济学奖颁给以色列经济学家罗伯特-奥曼和美国经济学家托马斯-谢林，以表彰这两位经济学家“因通过博弈论分析加强了我们对冲突和合作的理解”所作出的贡献。　　2004年诺贝尔经济学奖颁给出生在挪威的经济学家基德兰德和美国经济学家普雷斯科特，以表彰这两位经济学家因对动态宏观经济学所作出的贡献。　　2003年诺贝尔经济学奖颁给美国经济学家罗伯特·恩格尔和英国经济学家克莱夫·格兰杰。获得者发明了处理许多经济时间序列两个关键特性的统计方法：时间变化的变更率和非平稳性。　　2002年诺贝尔经济学奖授予美国普林斯顿大学的丹尼尔·卡恩曼(DanielKahneman拥有美国和以色列双重国籍)和美国乔治·梅森大学的弗农·史密斯(VernonL.Smith)。表彰其在“认知心理学家有关人为判断和决策的分析和实验经济学家对经济学理论的实验性测试”领域中的先锋贡献。2001年诺贝尔经济学奖授予美国经济学家乔治-阿克洛夫、麦克尔-斯宾塞和约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨。以表彰三位经济学家是在现代信息经济学研究领域作出的突出贡献。　　2000年诺贝尔经济学奖授予美国芝加哥大学的詹姆斯-J-赫克曼和加州大学伯克利分校的丹尼尔-L-麦克法登，以表彰他们在微观计量经济学领域所作出的贡献。
阅读权限5威望0 级论坛币390118 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验2018 点帖子785精华0在线时间0 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 1172, 距离下一级还需 203 积分
权限: 自定义头衔, 签名中使用图片, 隐身
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡, 匿名卡, 抢沙发下一级可获得
权限: 设置帖子权限道具: 提升卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
阅读权限28威望0 级论坛币27081 个学术水平17 点热心指数20 点信用等级7 点经验9315 点帖子453精华0在线时间369 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 1023, 距离下一级还需 352 积分
权限: 自定义头衔, 签名中使用图片, 隐身
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡, 匿名卡, 抢沙发下一级可获得
权限: 设置帖子权限道具: 提升卡
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
开心签到天数: 1 天连续签到: 1 天[LV.1]初来乍到
这个可能是假新闻，新浪财经上面没看见美国和以色列经济学家共同获得2007年诺贝尔经济学奖（转载） .cn 2007年10月14日&& 新浪财经克鲁格曼&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 格罗斯曼&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 赫尔普曼&&瑞典斯德哥尔摩消息 一年一度的诺贝尔经济学奖于北京时间10月14日凌晨在瑞典首都斯德哥尔摩的瑞典皇家科学院揭晓，这比预定的时间提前的数个小时。瑞典皇家科学院已决定将2007年的诺贝尔经济学奖颁发给麻省理工学院的保罗·克鲁格曼、普林斯顿大学的吉尼·格罗斯曼和以色列特拉维夫大学的艾赫南·赫尔普曼，以表彰他们对贸易与市场结构、贸易与经济增长以及贸易与政治体制问题的研究成果。三位经济学家将共享1000万瑞典克朗（1美元约合7瑞典克朗）的奖金。&&& 瑞典皇家科学院认为，他们的研究成果使人们更加了解了贸易发生和作用的机制，在今天全球经济更加自由的背景下，他们的见解显得更为重要。&&& 克鲁格曼1953生于美国，1977年在麻省理工学院获得经济学博士学位。格罗斯曼1955年生于美国，1980年在麻省理工学院获得经济学博士学位。赫尔普曼1946年出生于以色列，1974年在哈佛大学获得经济学博士学位。&&& 克鲁格曼得知自己获得诺贝尔经济学奖后表示，尽管很多人先前就认为他可以得到诺贝尔奖，但他并不觉得会这么早。同时他还说他有很多杰出的同事也做出了和他一样甚至更重要的贡献。&&& 格罗斯曼在接受采访时表示，自己还有很多重要课题正在进行，诺贝尔奖并不会改变他的计划。赫尔普曼这一学期正在为哈佛大学开设国际贸易学课，哈佛大学为他举行了一个简短的新闻发布会，赫尔普曼很幽默地说，他很兴奋，但是现在他最担心的问题就是今天的国际贸易学课同学们还会不会有心情认真听课。新浪调查 您认为中国的经济学家何时有望问鼎诺贝尔经济学奖？5年以内；10年以内；30年以内；&&& 我就没指望过。
阅读权限18威望0 级论坛币121 个学术水平0 点热心指数0 点信用等级0 点经验353 点帖子37精华0在线时间18 小时注册时间最后登录
积分 55, 距离下一级还需 30 积分
道具: 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 热点灯, 雷鸣之声, 涂鸦板, 金钱卡, 显身卡下一级可获得
权限: 自定义头衔
购买后可立即获得
权限: 隐身
道具: 金钱卡, 雷鸣之声, 彩虹炫, 雷达卡, 涂鸦板, 热点灯
一定是Paul Krugman 国际经济学
论坛好贴推荐