The winner of this year's Nobel Prize for economics, Edmund Phelps, is a giant in the field. His contributions have been, and remain, so important that they have altered traditional ways of thinking. According to the social science citations index, he ranks well among the most important economists since Adam Smith. Economists working on the macro economy, its micro foundations, exogenous and endogenous growth theory, the formation of expectations and problems of information and discrimination all refer back to Phelps.
After a brilliant secondary education, Phelps entered Amherst College in Massachusetts without any specific idea about which discipline to embrace or which career to follow. He was passionate about philosophy but, at the insistence of his father, took classes in economics.
As nearly always happens, Phelps' choice of vocation came after meeting an important professor, in this case the Harvard economist James Nelson.
After some hesitation, Phelps decided to pursue graduate education. Paul Samuelson admits that he agreed to do a conference at Amherst with the sole aim of recruiting Phelps to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). But Phelps chose Yale, where he came into direct contact with James Tobin and Thomas Schelling. He wrote his thesis under Tobin's supervision.
With a doctorate in hand, Phelps spent a year at Rand Corp in Los Angeles before returning to Yale. He spent another year at MIT, where he taught with Robert Solow and met Samuelson and Franco Modigliani. Stints at the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University followed.
By this point, Phelps had already acquired an international reputation through his work on the golden rule of capital accumulation. He was only 28 years old. This concept now appears in the toolbox of every economist, is taught in all classes on growth, and serves as a reference in all works on the macro economy.
Later, Phelps developed a long-term growth theory based on education and technical advances. However, this contribution was so far ahead of its time that the profession did not discover its importance until a quarter-century later, when theorists were developing endogenous growth theories.
Phelps was also 10 to 20 years ahead of the profession when he developed the theories of wage efficiency and inflation targeting, which are now considered to be the state of the art concerning the labor market and monetary management.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Phelps' encounters with Amartya Sen, John Rawls, and Kenneth Arrow at Stanford revived his philosophical streak. He had extremely valuable intellectual conversations with Rawls, prompting him to write several essays on the theory of economic justice and publish a book on the subject in 1974 -- a book still used today.
Phelps was behind the modern reworking of the macro economy -- and, according to Samuelson, the micro economy, too. His research program consisted of introducing the imperfection of information and knowledge into economic theory, which he then reformulated, giving serious consideration to agents' expectations. In Microeconomic Foundations of Employment and Inflation Theory, a famous work that he published and to which he made three major contributions, he set the scene for what would become the greatest revolution in economic theory of the last 50 years.
It is to Phelps that we owe the theory of the natural unemployment rate -- a cornerstone of modern macroeconomic theory and economic policy that Milton Friedman rediscovered a year later, albeit heuristically. Phelps was also responsible for the "island parable," which helped explain why monetary policy can have temporary real effects as a result of imperfect information.
The bulk of Phelps' current work consists of a new reworking of structuralist theory, in an effort to show how changes in interest rates and asset prices affect the equilibrium unemployment rate over the medium term. Phelps' new theory provides a logical backdrop against which we can assess the consequences of fluctuations in share prices, exchange rates, and, more generally, the value of physical assets and human capital under the powerful influence of new technologies and innovation.
These are, of course, the main phenomena that economic theory struggles to explain nowadays. So it is easy to understand why Phelps still leads the way. Indeed, we can expect his new theoretical framework to become a reference point in a decade or two.
When recommending an Indian mathematician to a Harvard colleague, Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote that "scientific geniuses generally have one great idea in their life; he has had two."
What could we say about Phelps?
Jean-Paul Fitoussi is president of the French Observatory of Economic Conditions.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with