Sputnik — Pashinyan Invites Renowned US Economist to Restore Armenia’s Economy

Prominent US Economist Daron Acemoglu, the professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), has agreed to provide his assistance in restoring Armenia’s economy after the country was hit with a wave of anti-government protests, newly-elected Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said on Sunday.

“I just had a phone conversation with widely known economist of Armenian origin Daren Acemoglu. He said that he is ready to help Armenia in the issue of restoring and developing the economy. Mr.Acemoglu has accepted the invitation to visit Armenia,” Pashinyan wrote on Facebook.

Heaven help them. Just kidding.

Daren Acemoglu is a decent choice if the choice is among prominent Western developmental economists. They could do a lot worse.

He is a New Institutionalist. And both parents are Armenian even though he was born in Istanbul.

Sputnik International
Pashinyan Invites Renowned US Economist to Restore Armenia’s Economy

Chris Dillow — In Praise Of Complexity Economics

Good post summarizing complexity economics with many useful links.

The question is: why is complexity economics not more influential? 

One reason is that it requires different techniques. It can't be studied merely by problem sets (ugh) devoted to standard optimization techniques. Instead, it requires agent-based simulations (here are a couple of examples), laboratory experiments of the sort done by Charles Noussair among others, or close attention to history and the institutional and cultural settings in which markets operate. 

And therein lies a second reason why complexity economics is under-rated. For me, one of its big messages is that context matters. Emergent processes sometimes lead to benign outcomes and sometimes instead to inequality and inefficiency, and which turns out to be the case can hinge on quite small differences. The great economists of the 20th century - such as Keynes, Samuelson or Friedman - tried to offer a general theory. Complexity economics doesn't. 

There's a third reason why complexity economics is under-rated. It does not give us a means of foreseeing the future. Of course, conventional economics doesn't do so either. But the difference is that complexity theory tells us that such forecasts might well be impossible - which is not what the customer wants to hear. The best it can do is help us understand what has happened. And for me, this is good enough. As someone once said, "Economists have only changed the world; the point, however, is to understand it."

Stumbling and Mumbling

In Praise Of Complexity Economics

Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle

Branko Milanovic — My take on the Acemoglu-Robinson critique of Piketty

A couple of days ago Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson published a critique of Piketty’s Capital in the 21st century. It is published here. Because of the renown of the authors, perhaps more than because of its intrinsic quality, it is a review worth reading. I read it today and my brief reaction to the three main critiques by Acemoglu and Robinson is as follows.…

globalinequality
My take on the Acemoglu-Robinson critique of Piketty
Branko Milanovic