哈佛经济系主任突发离世, 新政治经济学之父, 诺奖得主克鲁格曼死对头, “博科尼男孩”中坚人物!

凡是搞计量经济的，都关注这个号了

稿件：[e-mail]

所有计量经济圈方法论丛的code程序, 宏微观数据库和各种软件都放在社群里.欢迎到计量经济圈社群交流访问.

哈佛大学经济系前系主任，新政治经济学之父（缔造者之一），“博科尼男孩”中坚人物——Alberto Alesina于2020年5月23日因突发心脏病逝世，享年63岁。

Alberto Alesina是一位意大利政治经济学家，美国哈佛大学经济系教授。1957年生于意大利，1981年获得意大利博科尼大学的经济学学士学位（末日博士鲁比尼也毕业于此），此后他赴哈佛大学深造，获得硕士学位和博士学位。其博士生导师为Jeffrey Sachs，现为哥伦比亚大学校级教授（最高教授职称），著名全球发展问题专家，前联合国秘书长安南的高级顾问，东欧国家休克疗法之父。

从2003年至2006年，Alesina担任哈佛大学经济学系主任。他是哈佛大学Nathaniel Ropes政治经济学讲席教授。Alesina是实证政治经济学（positive political economics）之父（缔造者之一），是意大利当下最具国际影响力的经济学家之一，且因其在政治经济学领域的创造性贡献曾被提名诺贝尔经济学奖。实证政治经济学试图解释经济政策，这些政策要求了解政府的组成方式，政府的决策方式以及行事的原则等等。

Alesina是国家经济研究局NBER， 伦敦经济政策研究中心和计量经济学学会的成员，并且是NBER政治经济项目组主任。他于2006年就当选为美国艺术与科学研究院院士。正因为Alesina的种种荣誉，让他成为其意大利母校——博科尼大学最知名的校友之一，并让“博科尼男孩”成为欧洲经济政策制定中最具影响力的经济学团体。

截至2020年4月，在实证政治经济学领域中，Alesina位列第三位。

截至2020年4月，在公共经济学领域中，Alesina位列第七位。

路透社曾经预测过谁会得到诺贝尔经济学奖，Alesina赫然在列，主要因为他在政治和宏观经济两者关系的分析中的开创性贡献。

NBER政治经济项目组主任就是Alesina教授。

博科尼男孩”成为欧洲经济政策制定中最具影响力的经济学团体。

他出版了五本书，并编辑了更多书。他最近出版的两本书是《欧洲的未来：改革或衰落》，以及《在美国和欧洲与贫困作斗争：差异世界》。他曾担任《Quarterly Journal of Economics》的共同主编八年，并且是许多学术期刊的副编辑。他在全球许多主要报纸上发表专栏文章。他是在线经济政策和研究杂志Voxeu.org和Lavoce.info的创始撰稿人。

Alesina的工作涉及多个主题，包括：

• 政治经济周期

• 财政政策和预算赤字的政治经济学

• 欧洲一体化的过程

• 高通胀国家的稳定政策

• 货币联盟

• 重新分配政策的政治经济决定因素

• 美国和欧洲福利国家的差异

• 美国和欧洲经济体系的差异

• 替代选举制度对经济政策的影响

• 确定不同选举制度的选择

---

凯恩斯主义的坚定反对者，就扩张性紧缩（expansionary austerity）与2008年诺贝尔经济学奖得主克鲁格曼Paul Krugman多次互怼

Alesina是一个“在大萧条期间实行紧缩政策”的有力支持者。Alesina认为，在政府支出减少被总需求（私人消费，私人投资和出口）增加抵消的情况下，紧缩性政策可能会产生扩张性刺激效应。

2009年10月，Alesina和Silvia Ardagna发表了《财政政策的大变化：税收vs支出》，这是一篇在学术圈极度引人注目的学术论文，旨在表明财政紧缩措施不仅不会损害经济，实际上还有助于经济复苏。2010年，Carmen Reinhart和Kenneth Rogoff发表了论文《债务时代的增长》，该论文被广泛接受，为大萧条期间席卷欧洲的财政紧缩浪潮奠定了基础。2013年4月，马萨诸塞大学阿默斯特分校的经济学家Thomas Herndon，Michael Ash和Robert Pollin发现Reinhart-Rogoff论文存在缺陷，部分原因是电子表格中存在编码错误。

2013年6月6日，美国经济学家和2008年诺贝尔奖获得者保罗·克鲁格曼（Paul Krugman ）在《纽约书评》上发表了“紧缩案如何崩溃”，指出上述文章对政策制定者的影响力何其之大。Krugman将博科尼男孩”(Bocconi Boys)中Alesina和Ardagna的论文描述为“对凯恩斯主义主张的全面正面攻击（该主张认为，在经济疲弱的情况下削减支出会导致经济进一步走弱），但在现实检验中往往不正确”。

看看Alesina vs Krugman围绕扩张性紧缩的论战：

Russ: I just have to quote–I have to give you two quotes here. One is from Paul Krugman, in November of 2015. And the second is Paul Krugman in April of 2015. Here’s the first one: “The doctrine of expansionary austerity–the proposition that cuts in government spending would actually cause higher growth despite their direct negative impact on demand, thanks to the confidence fairy–was all the rage in policy circles five years ago. But it brutally failed the reality test; instead, the evidence pointed overwhelmingly to the continued existence of something very like the old-fashioned Keynesian multiplier.”

The second one is even more pointed: “Meanwhile, all of the economic research that allegedly supported the austerity push has been discredited. Widely touted statistical results were, it turned out, based on highly dubious assumptions and procedures–plus a few outright mistakes–and evaporated under closer scrutiny. It is rare, in the history of economic thought, for debates to get resolved this decisively. The austerian ideology that dominated elite discourse five years ago has collapsed, to the point where hardly anyone still believes it. Hardly anyone, that is, except the coalition that still rules Britain–and most of the British media.

Alesina: Well, I think Paul Krugman has rather extreme views. But more importantly, he talks about his views as if they were obviously true, and anybody who would disagree with him was obviously wrong. And he exaggerates. And that I really prefer not to go into a discussion about his quotes.

But I think that the idea that the work about austerity that I and others have done has been discredited is wrong. In fact, the IMF, in 2010 wrote a rather pointed criticism about my work, in particular about two points: one, whether spending cuts were less much less costly than tax increases in terms of austerity policy. And when everything, after everything was said and done and written, even the IMF acknowledged–had to conclude that this was indeed the case: that spending cuts were much less costly than tax increases. Now, the reason that not completely clear to me they seemed to underscore this message of their own work was, if you read the published paper of this IMF research, you will conclude that they also agree with this conclusion. Which is the fundamental result about austerity, on which my work is based. So on this point, actually, I think Krugman is completely wrong. I think there is uncontroversial evidence that spending cuts are much less costly than tax increases.

And this point is exactly the opposite. Now, the second point is whether there are cases where spending cuts accompanied by other policies can be expansionary, and the confidence argument that he makes fun of is actually confidence, one of the many aspects; and we can elaborate on that. But I think that there are several episodes in which fiscal spending cuts have been accompanied not by a recession, but by an expansion. So, I think that those kind of statements by Krugman are trying to push a view which is respectable but they are not proven by the facts. Or at least they are not supported by research.

出版的代表性文章如下，对政治经济学感兴趣的学者，可以看看其最高被引文章“Distributive politics and economic growth”。

• 1987. "Macroeconomic Policy in a Two-Party System as a Repeated Game," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(3), p pp. 651–678.
• 1988b. "Macroeconomics and Politics," NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1988, Volume 3, pp. 13–62.
• 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?" (with Allan Drazen), American Economic Review, 81(5), pp. 1170–1188.
• 1993. "Central Bank Independence and Macroeconomic Performance: Some Comparative Evidence" (with Lawrence H. Summers), Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 25(2), p pp. 151–162.
• 1994. "Distributive Politics and Economic Growth" (with Dani Rodrik), Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(2), p pp. 465–490.
• 1995. "The Political Economy of Budget Deficits" (with Roberto Perotti), IMF Staff Papers, 42(1), pp. pp. 1–31.
• 1996a. "Political Instability and Economic Growth" (with Sule Özler et al.), Journal of Economic Growth, 1(2), p pp. 189–211.
• 1996b. "Income Distribution, Political Instability, and Investment," (with Roberto Perotti), European Economic Review, 40(6), pp. 1203–1228. Abstract.
• 1997. "On the Number and Size of Nations" (with Enrico Spolaore), Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), p pp. 1027–1056.
• 1999. "Public Goods and Ethnic Divisions" (with Reza Baqir & William Easterly), Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), pp. 1243–1284.[permanent dead link]
• 2000a. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?" (with David Dollar), Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1), p pp. 33–63.
• 2000b. "Participation in Heterogeneous Communities" (with Eliana La Ferrara), Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), p pp. 847–904.
• 2002a. "Who Trusts Others?" Journal of Public Economics, 85(2), pp. 207–234 (close Pages tab).
• 2002b. "Fiscal Policy, Profits, and Investment" (with Silvia Ardagna et al.), American Economic Review, 92(3), pp. 571–589.
• 2003. "Fractionalization" (with Arnaud Devleeschauwer et al.), Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2), p pp. 155–194.
• 2004. "Inequality and Happiness: Are Europeans and Americans Different?" (with Rafael Di Tellab and Robert MacCulloch), Journal of Public Economics, 88(9–10), pp. 2009–2042 (close Bookmarks tab).
• 2005a. "International Unions" (with Ignazio Angeloni and Federico Etro), American Economic Review, 95(3), p pp. 602–615.
• 2005b. "Ethnic Diversity and Economic Performance" (with Eliana La Ferrara), Journal of Economic Literature, 43(3), pp. 762–800.
• 2007:3. "Political Economy," NBER Reporter, pp. 1–5 (press +).
• 2010. "Large Changes in Fiscal Policy: Taxes versus Spending" (with Silvia Ardagna), in J. R. Brown, ed., Tax Policy and the Economy, v. 24, ch. 2, pp. 35–68. doi:10.1086/649828
• 2015. "The Output Effect of Fiscal Consolidations" (with Carlo Favero and Francesco Giavazzi), Journal of International Economics, vol 96, pages S19-S42. doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2014.11.003
• 2016. "Ethnic Inequality" (with Stelios Michalopoulos and Elias Papaioannou), Journal of Political Economy, vol. 124(2), pages 428-488 doi:10.1086/685300
  2016. "Birthplace Diversity and Economic Prosperity" (with Johann Harnoss and Hillel Rapoport), Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 21(2), pages 101-138 doi:10.1007/s10887-016-9127-6
  经济学界为Alesina悼念：
  
  包括其同事Dani Rodrik，IMF前首席经济学家Olivier Blanchard等。
  

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.pol.html#authors

https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.pbe.html#authors

https://scholar.harvard.edu/alesina/publications

http://blogs.reuters.com/macroscope/2010/09/21/who-will-win-this-years-nobel-prize-for-economics/

让我们一起悼念Alberto Alesina, RIP.

下面这些短链接文章属于合集，可以收藏起来阅读，不然以后都找不到了。

2.5年，计量经济圈近1000篇不重类计量文章，

可直接在公众号菜单栏搜索任何计量相关问题,

Econometrics Circle

数据系列：空间矩阵 | 工企数据 | PM2.5 | 市场化指数 | CO2数据 |  夜间灯光 | 官员方言  | 微观数据 | 内部数据计量系列：匹配方法 | 内生性 | 工具变量 | DID | 面板数据 | 常用TOOL | 中介调节 | 时间序列 | RDD断点 | 合成控制 | 200篇合辑 | 因果识别 | 社会网络 | 空间DID数据处理：Stata | R | Python | 缺失值 | CHIP/ CHNS/CHARLS/CFPS/CGSS等 |干货系列：能源环境 | 效率研究 | 空间计量 | 国际经贸 | 计量软件 | 商科研究 | 机器学习 | SSCI | CSSCI | SSCI查询 | 名家经验计量经济圈组织了一个计量社群，有如下特征：热情互助最多、前沿趋势最多、社科资料最多、社科数据最多、科研牛人最多、海外名校最多。因此，建议积极进取和有强烈研习激情的中青年学者到社群交流探讨，始终坚信优秀是通过感染优秀而互相成就彼此的。