This year’s Nobel prizes prompt soul-searching among economists
The rise of randomised controlled trials looks to some like a retreat from the biggest questions
NOBEL PRIZES are usually given in recognition of ideas that are already more or less guaranteed a legacy. But occasionally they prompt as much debate as admiration. This year’s economics award, given to Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer, was unusual both for the recency of the contributions it recognised and the relative youth of the recipients. (For a review of “Good Economics for Hard Times”, by Mr Banerjee and Ms Duflo, see Books and arts section.) Intentionally or not, it has inflamed arguments about the direction of the profession.
This article appeared in the Finance & economics section of the print edition under the headline “Works in progress”
Finance & economics November 23rd 2019
- Big Tech takes aim at the low-profit retail-banking industry
- Pope Francis promised to clean up the Vatican’s murky finances
- Excess Asian savings are weighing on global interest rates
- How machine learning is revolutionising market intelligence
- Firms that analyse climate risks are the latest hot property
- What next for Europe’s banking union?
- Why currency traders are serene even as Western politics gets messy
- This year’s Nobel prizes prompt soul-searching among economists
More from Finance & economics
Can anything spark Europe’s economy back to life?
Mario Draghi, the continent’s unofficial chief technocrat, has a plan
Has social media broken the stockmarket?
That is the contention of Cliff Asness, one of the great quant investors
American office delinquencies are shooting up
How worried should investors be?
China is suffering from a crisis of confidence
Can anything perk up its economy?
America has a huge deficit. Which candidate would make it worse?
Enough policies have been proposed to make a call
Why Oasis fans should welcome price-gouging
There are worse things in life than paying a fair price