2024-10-15 15:10:00
The Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded on 14 October to three economists: the American-Turkish Daron Acemoglu and the Anglo-Americans Simon Johnson and James Robinson. A trio recognized internationally for their work on inequalities.
Three names unknown to mere mortals… But on the economic planet Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson are stars. To talk about it, some teachers only use their initials: “AJR”. Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson are professors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, near Boston. James Robinson teaches at the University of Chicago.
Read alsoNobel Prize in Economics awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson
A decisive colonial history
If the Nobel committee awarded them it is because they answered – at least in part – a fundamental question: why are there rich countries and poor countries? According to them, the answer lies in the institutions. When democratic and inclusive regimes promote prosperity, those in authoritarian and less open-to-trade countries slow it down.
Their work is based on the study of colonial history. According to their analysis, countries that were settler colonies prospered more than those that were “extractive” colonies, exploited by Europeans primarily for their natural wealth. A country that democratizes would be 8 to 9 years ahead of ANDState that did not initiate this evolution.
With this prize, the Nobel Committee reminds us that it is urgent to give an answer to the question of inequalities. « It’s a choice that comes at the right time, believes Erik Angner, economist and professor of philosophy at Stockholm University. At a time when institutions are threatened from all sides, by populism, by wars… These winners have a message for us, that our democratic and political institutions are essential for peace and prosperity. »
A counterexample : China
However, some experts remain critical of this theory. Denis Cogneau recognizes the importance of explaining part of international inequalities through the colonial past. “ On the other handcontinues, the idea that everything is determined from the beginning is perhaps a little too simplistic, a little too caricatural. »
Another criticism: if institutions are the first factor that influences the development of a country it is because there is a good social structure, and the others are bad. “ Through the concept of “good institution” it is difficult to get rid of the fact that there is no American model behind it. », sums up Denis Cogneau.
Main counterexample mentioned: China. The country has experienced enormous growth over the past thirty years, despite remaining an authoritarian regime. In an interview with the press during the awards ceremony, Daron Acemoglu himself admitted: “ democracy is not a panacea “. But according to him it remains a “ substantial gain » for the development of a country.
#Nobel #Prize #Economics #rewards #specialists #inequalities
