Economics Nobel Predictions

I can’t believe there is much demand for it, but the online betting site Pinnacle Sports is taking wagers on this year’s Nobel Prize in economics. Here are the odds they are offering as of my writing this post:

101 Martin Feldstein +751

102 Thomas Sargent +1181

103 Robert Barro +1341

104 Paul Romer +1344

105 Jagdish Bhagwati +1359

106 Paul Krugman +1617

107 N. Gregory Mankiw +4310

108 Any other person -136

My hunch is that the bargain here is “any other person.” There is plenty of randomness in the choices each year, and this list excludes a number of people who I would think would be on the short list, e.g. Gene Fama, Peter Diamond, Oliver Hart, and Richard Posner, just to name a few.

I have a colleague who told me some time back that he had identified a strong leading indicator of economists who think they are on the short list for winning the prize: getting a haircut the week before the Nobel is announced. He claims to have many data points supporting his theory.

The economics Nobel is announced Monday. If I’m not mistaken, this very colleague is sporting a snazzy new haircut.

Zao Pingzhang

I think Robert Barro and N.Gregory Mankiw are very hopeful to get the prize.

Rob Marrs

Hernando de Soto?

Alex Robertts

Its hard to take these awards seriously. After all the great John Kenneth Galbraith was not nominated, and there so much politics involved.

john kadvany

I bet on Janos Kornai of Hungary. A true maverick, Kornai developed critical models of centrally-planned economies. He's a model of the kind of thinking we need more of as our current system morphs into something new.

paul davidson

Interesting that no one has even thought of naming someone who was faithful to Keynes's analytical framework -- although newspaper editorials around the world are calling for a return of Keynes's economics in theie editorials , letters to the editor, op-ed pieces, and other articles-- e.g., The Guardian, the New York Times, The Washington Post to name a few.

Richard England

I can't comprehend why William Baumol (Princeton, NYU) has not yet won the Nobel. He is one of the greats of the 20th century and still great in the 21st. The scope of his scholarly output is awe inspiring. Perhaps that's the problem. The Nobel Committee likes technicians, not Renaissance men or women.

Robert Reid

I'm quite certain it will be Paul Krugman.

David Pendlebury

Thomson Reuters's predictions for the 2008 Nobel Prize in Economics appear at:

slammin' sammy


George Bush took 'other' as well. I guess you were a C- student too.


what? no Bernanke? uh oh, we must really be in deep kimshe


On the other hand Heaton, there are few upsides to those who don't gamble.

I'm hoping for a swede :-)

S. Heaton

What a useless exercise. The field is too large for a single prize - I hope that the prize is given this year to someone who helped us learn how to measure risk. This person should share the prize with whoever made the observation that there is a downside to taking a gamble.


I think the vote for Mankiw is due to a) his public profile, on the blogs and in the Administration and b) his textbook.

If it's possible, short him.

I would say Paul Romer, for his early work and not his developmental work (obviously). Baghwati and Krugman may win simultaneously on trade theory someday.


#4 PDB

As a fervent disciple of the information asymmetry work done by Akerlof and Stiglitz (2001 Nobel), I say shame on you, sir!

'Course, no one's figured out what to do with it yet, thus limiting its practical value... but still!


I think if Barro wins it should be shared with Summers and Heston.

Econometricians are absent from the list, which might be dangerous given that it's five years since Engle and Granger. I'm not a Bayesian but I suspect that Zellner might be in with a shot.


I beleive that is the same Paul Krugman of textbook fame, who makes my job grading a pain. Go Mankiw!


The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics is worthless, as recently evidenced by the utter failure of many of the grand theories that have been spouted out by the laureates. Read the acceptance speech of Friedrich Hayek, one of the very few who actually deserved the award (and also wanted it abolished):

Edward Lee

I'm surprised that the total vig only adds up to 6%.


Paul Krugman? I'll take "other", thank you.

Steve Long

I'll give 5 to 1 on Krugman.

(Anyone who takes me up on this, of course, has only himself to blame.)

But how is it that Richard Posner could have lost? After all, wasn't it he who gave us the perspective on economic theory known as Anne Coulter?