Of course, I mean the Nobel Prize for Economics.
Here is a link to Prof. Greg Mankiw’s post http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/10/my-bet-on-nobel.html, he, as an economist, used data to show that past winners all got huge amount of citations.
I wrote a few papers on predicting movie sales from word-of-mouth. The one using a Bayesian Model gives amazing power. A hollywood media consulting company emailed us (my co-authors Prof. Chris Dellarocas, Prof. Neveen Awad and I) about creating a software to do the predictions. I guess that model could have gotten us quite some money, however, we had more fun things to do than to work on a software.
For this issue, I don’t have data. So let me use a behavioral method to predict (a.k.a guess).
Some people said Romer and Tirole, I don’t think they can be put together. They are working in different areas, and they are kind of young for Nobel. Romer is invited to UST for an IAS talk, they typically only invite nobel prize winners, so I guess he has a good chance this time, if not next. Tirole is amazing, I liked his papers, his books, and his lectures (He came to MIT to guest lecture in the IO class. Erik and I went to him once to consult about our idea on innovation incentives. He pointed us to some Michael Spence’s papers, they can not be more relevant). Only problem is that he’s too young.
I was reading quite a few papers on efficient market hypothesis these days due to a project on price’s informational role in asset markets. (Why I’m writing a finance paper? This is related to information! And to me, everything related to information is related to information technology). Fama and Shleifer were quoted so many times. I’m not a big fun of EMH (efficient market hypothesis), but who ever contributed to it lead finance into the prime time in b-schools. Fama should definitely be credited for it.
I took Holmstrom’s class, he has some very influential papers, so I guess he has a good chance.
Robert Gordon contributed significantly to Macroeconomics, but under two grounds I don’t think he’s the one. 1. there has been some recent awards in Macro, can’t be so soon. 2. he really doesn’t understand IT and its impact to the society. I was totally disappointed by his keynote speech in last year’s WISE conference at Northwestern U.
Overall, I would vote for Fama and Shleifer. If I can not do it correctly, I’ll develop a Bayesian model on this next year.
Can’t wait till Oct 15 to get the result.