Research Economist at the Bank of England
Alex Tabarrok points out the amusing truth:
Ladbrokes gives Eugene Fama the best odds for winning the economics Nobel. Thus, if Fama wins he will have deserved to have won and if Fama loses he will not have deserved to have won. The Nobel committee cannot go wrong no matter what it does! Think about it.
There is no doubt in my mind that Professor Krugman deserves this, but who doesn’t think that this is just a little bit of an “I told you so” from Sweden to the USA?
Update: Alex Tabarrok gives a simple summary of New Trade Theory. Do read Tyler Cowen for a summary of Paul Krugman’s work, his more esoteric writing and some analysis of the award itself.
I have to say I did not expect him to win until Bush left office, as I thought the Swedes wanted the resulting discussion to focus on Paul’s academic work rather than on issues of politics. So I am surprised by the timing but not by the choice.
…
This was definitely a “real world” pick and a nod in the direction of economists who are engaged in policy analysis and writing for the broader public. Krugman is a solo winner and solo winners are becoming increasingly rare. That is the real statement here, namely that Krugman deserves his own prize, all to himself. This could easily have been a joint prize, given to other trade figures as well, but in handing it out solo I believe the committee is a) stressing Krugman’s work in economic geography, and b) stressing the importance of relevance for economics