Perhaps Hicks and Allais could be mentioned in the sense of "changing
sides", the one siding more and the other less close to Hayek's ideas
as years went by.
Carlos Rodríguez Braun
Universidad Complutense
Madrid - Spain
2013/8/26 Pedro Teixeira <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear David,
>
> I wonder if you could be more explicit about the criteria used to classify one scholar as notably or only a little or significantly.
> Although I understand that there is an inevitable degree of subjectivity involved in these assessments, I think our reply to your questions is largely conditioned by those criteria.
> I also wonder what was the reason to exclude authors such as Gary Becker, Joseph Stiglitz, or Gunnar Myrdal.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pedro
>
> Pedro Nuno Teixeira
> Director - CIPES, Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies - www.cipes.up.pt
> Associate Professor - Faculty of Economics, University of Porto - www.fep.up.pt
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Colander, David C. <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> I playing the role of overseer of a project organized by Dan Klein to consider the intellectual migration of Nobel Prize winning economist’s policy views. The project will be published in the journal, Econ Journal Watch, in September. What “overseer” means is that I am a type of referee before publication, and my job is to keep him honest, and see that his analysis is not overly influenced by his political views. His goal with the project, is to see which Nobel Prize winning economists can be classified as having become more or less classical liberal. Classical liberal is, of course, a difficult term to define, but what he means by classical liberal is a presumption in policy judgment away from government involvement and toward letting the market handle it. Given this definition, he has tentatively come up with the following readings for 16 laureates:
>
>
> Laureates Who Grew
> Either More or Less
> Classical Liberal
>
>
>
>
> Grew
> More Classical Liberal
>
>
>
> Quite significantly
>
>
> James Buchanan
> Ronald Coase
> Robert Fogel
> Friedrich Hayek
> Franco Modigliani
> Douglass North
> Vernon Smith
>
>
>
> Notably
>
>
>
> Theodore Schultz
>
>
>
> Only a little
>
>
>
> Kenneth Arrow
> Milton Friedman
> Eric Maskin
> (Edmund Phelps?)
> George Stigler
>
>
>
>
>
> Grew
> Less
> Classical
> Liberal
>
>
> Quite significantly
>
>
>
> Ragnar Frisch
> Bertil Ohlin
>
>
> Notably
>
>
>
> Peter Diamond
>
>
> Only a little
>
>
>
> Paul Krugman
>
>
> Please note that Dan's placements are still tentative. He and I fully recognize that there are many different definitions of classical liberal that one could use, and I am not asking people to comment on those definitions here. (I will comment on it at length in my contribution to his project.) But I would be interested in the list’s views about the movements he has found. Specifically, I have two questions:
> 1. Do any of his classifications stand out as not fitting your expectations?
> 2. Are there other Nobel Prize winners who you would see as having moved in their policy views that should be included in the list?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
>
> David Colander
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> 802-443-5302<tel:802-443-5302>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mario J. Rizzo
> NEW YORK UNIVERSITY
> Department of Economics
> 19 West 4th Street,
> Seventh Floor (725)
> New York, NY 10012
> 212-998-8932 (telephone, e-mail preferred)
> 212-995-4186 (fax)
>
> Personal website: http://works.bepress.com/mario_rizzo
>
> Colloquium: http://econ.as.nyu.edu/object/econ.event.colloquium
>
> Blog: http://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com
>
> Book Series: http://www.routledge.com/books/series/Routledge_Foundations_of_the_Market_Economy/
|
