※ 引述《hsiuchuanwin (win)》之铭言： : 唯一的不同是，计量模式或评价模式推导的学者，可以有机会赢得诺贝尔， : 而实证的学者，跟据我所知，目前还没有人获得诺贝尔， This is definitely wrong and misleading. Let's look at some of the Nobel Laureates in the past 15 years. In 2004, Kydland and Prescott got the prize "for their contributions to dynamic macroeconomics: the time consistency of economic policy and the driving forces behind business cycles." The second part - identifying driving forces behind business cycles" - is empirical (calibration). In 2002, Vernon Smith got the prize "for having established laboratory experiments as a tool in empirical economic analysis." In 2000, James Heckman got the prize "for his development of theory and methods for analyzing selective smaples." However, all his contributions in econometric theory were motivated by the needs of his extensive and numerous empirical studies on labor economics, and especially education. In 1998, Amartya Sen got the prize "for his contribution to welfare economics." The Nobel Press Release talks about his contributions in detail. In brief, His contributions range from (1) axiomatic theory of social choice, over (2) definitions of welfare and poverty indexes, to (3) empirical studies of famine. Note that (2) and (3) are both empirical studies. In 1993, Robert Fogel and Douglass North gor the prize "for having renewed research in economic history by applying economic theory and quantitative methods in order to explain economic and institutional change." If you look in detail about what they have contributed, you will see they did a lot of empirical works, and this part was also emphasized in the Nobel Press Release. Gary Becker, the Nobel Laureat in 1992, did extensive empirical works to test his theories. His empirical work is also mentioned in the Nobel Press Release. In fact, we cannot separate Becker's empirical work from his contribution in theory. -- 社会主义救台湾 三民主义解放中国 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 70.80.45.76 ※ 编辑: economist 来自: 70.80.45.76 (06/29 01:01)