All news
Nobel Prize in Economics Awarded for Explaining Why Social Democracies Flourish
He won the Nobel Prize in Economics for explaining why social democracy thrives.
Observers note that this model does not always correspond to reality, especially in the case of China, which the author himself admits. On the other hand, this theory does not claim to be a plan for building a utopia, but only generalizes statistical data. What do economists think about the Nobel Prize for "promoting democracy"?
"Do it right, everything will be fine" - perhaps the words of the vocal and instrumental ensemble "Pnevmoslon" allow to briefly describe the essence of the work of Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson. He received the Nobel Prize in Economics. According to the press release, the authors demonstrate the importance of inclusive political and social systems for economic prosperity and that national economies cannot develop or change for the better without the rule of law or institutions that exploit the population.
What is more important here: economic science or democratic ideology? Alexander Auzan, dean of the economics department at Moscow State University, says:
One of the most obvious examples cited by the authors’ opponents is China’s economic growth, which does not quite fit the democratization theme of their work. As CNN points out, in 2012, Acemoglu predicted in his popular book “Why Some Countries Are Rich and Others Are Poor” that Beijing would not be able to sustain high rates of development. Ten years after the article was published, the economist acknowledged that China’s success was a “clear challenge” to his theory, but continued to argue that only inclusive institutions can ensure stable growth in the long term.
On the other hand, contradictions between the theories of Nobel laureates and reality do not necessarily refute them. Economic models describe general trends and rely on statistical information. Therefore, even when considering individual cases, such as China, it would be wrong to ignore the correlation between the welfare of a country and the nature of its institutions, which the author highlights. Economist Sergey Khestanov continues:
However, the recognition of the authors' ideas at the Nobel level makes the approach of Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson the world mainstream, and their works will certainly be cited by critics in countries with different social and political systems. Western. At least until other scientists prove, and quite convincingly, that everything is completely wrong.