Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to Be Justified by Subsequent Changes

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to Be Justified by Subsequent Changes Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justifiedby SubsequentChanges in Dividends? By ROBERTJ. SHILLER* A simple model that is commonlyused to and RichardPorter on the stock market,and interpret movements in corporate common by myself on the bond market. stock. price indexes asserts that real stock To illustrategraphically why it seems that prices equal the present value of rationally stock pricesare too volatile,I have plotted in expected or optimally forecastedfuture real Figure 1 a stock price index p, with its ex dividendsdiscounted by a constant real dis- post rational counterpart p* (data set 1).' count rate. This valuation model (or varia- The stock price index pt is the real Standard tions on it in which the real discount rate is and Poor's Composite Stock Price Index (de- not constant but fairly stable) is often used trended by dividing by a factor proportional by economistsand marketanalysts alike as a to the long-run exponential growth path) and plausible model to describe the behaviorof p* is the present discounted value of the aggregatemarket indexes and is viewed as actual subsequentreal dividends (also as a providing a reasonable story to tell when proportionof the same long-rungrowth fac- people ask what accounts for a sudden tor).2 The analogous series for a modified movement in stock price indexes. Such Dow Jones IndustrialAverage appear in Fig- movementsare then attributedto "new in- ure 2 (data set 2). One is struck by the formation" about future dividends. I will smoothness and stability of the ex post ra- refer to this model as the "efficientmarkets tional price series p* when compared with model"although it shouldbe recognizedthat the actualprice series.This behaviorof p* is this name has also been applied to other due to the fact that the presentvalue relation models. relatesp* to a long-weightedmoving average It has often been claimed in popular dis- of dividends(with weights correspondingto cussions that stock price indexes seem too discount factors) and moving averagestend "volatile," that is, that the movements in to smooth the series averaged. Moreover, stock price indexes could not realisticallybe while real dividendsdid vary over this sam- attributedto any objectivenew information, ple period, they did not vary long enough or since movementsin the priceindexes seem to far enough to cause majormovements in p*. be "too big" relative to actual subsequent For example, while one normally thinks of events. Recently, the notion that financial the Great Depression as a time when busi- asset prices are too volatile to accord with ness was bad, real dividends were substan- efficient markets has received some econo- tially below their long- run exponential metric supportin papers by Stephen LeRoy growth path (i.e., 10-25 percent below the *Associateprofessor, University of Pennsylvania,and 'The stock price index may look unfamiliarbecause researchassociate, National Bureauof Economic Re- it is deflatedby a priceindex, expressed as a proportion search.I am gratefulto ChristineAmsler for research of the long-rungrowth path and only Januaryfigures assistance,and to her as well as BenjaminFriedman, are shown.One mightnote, for example,that the stock Irwin Friend, Sanford Grossman, Stephen LeRoy, marketdecline of 1929-32 looks smallerthan the recent StephenRoss, and JeremySiegel for helpfulcomments. decline. In real terms,it was. The Januaryfigures also This researchwas supportedby the National Bureauof miss both the 1929peak and 1932 trough. EconomicResearch as part of the ResearchProject on 2The price and dividendseries as a proportionof the the ChangingRoles of Debt and Equity in Financing long-rungrowth path are definedbelow at the beginning U.S. Capital Formation sponsoredby the American of Section I. Assumptionsabout public knowledgeor Councilof Life Insuranceand by the National Science lack of knowledgeof the long-run growth path are Foundation under grant SOC-7907561. The views important,as shall be discussedbelow. The seriesp* is expressedhere are solelymy own and do not necessarily computed subject to an assumptionabout dividends representthe views of the supportingagencies. after 1978.See text and Figure3 below. 421 422 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW JUNE 1981 Index 300- Index 2000- 225! 1500 p 150- * 1000- 75- 500- 0 I year yeor 0 I I I I 1 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1928 1938 1948 1958 1968 1978 FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 Note: Real Standardand Poor'sComposite Stock Price Note:Real modified Dow JonesIndustrial Average (solid Index (solid line p) and ex post rationalprice (dotted line p) and ex post rational price (dotted line p*), line p*), 1871- 1979,both detrendedby dividinga long- 1928-1979,both detrendedby dividing by a long-run run exponentialgrowth factor. The variablep* is the exponentialgrowth factor. The variablep* is the present present value of actual subsequentreal detrendeddi- value of actual subsequentreal detrendeddividends, vidends, subject to an assumptionabout the present subject to an assumptionabout the present value in value in 1979 of dividends thereafter.Data are from 1979 of dividendsthereafter. Data are from Data Set 2, Data Set 1, Appendix. Appendix. growth path for the Standard and Poor's that p, =E,( p*), i.e., p, is the mathematical series, 16-38 percentbelow the growthpath expectation conditional on all information for the Dow Series)only for a few depression availableat time t of p*. In other words,p, is years: 1933, 1934, 1935, and 1938. The mov- the optimal forecast of p*. One can define ing averagewhich determinesp* will smooth the forecast error as u,= p* -pt. A funda- out such short-runfluctuations. Clearly the mental principleof optimal forecastsis that stock marketdecline beginningin 1929 and the forecast error u, must be uncorrelated ending in 1932 could not be rationalizedin with the forecast;that is, the covariancebe- terms of subsequentdividends! Nor could it tween p, and u, must be zero. If a forecast be rationalizedin terms of subsequentearn- error showed a consistent correlationwith ings, since earningsare relevantin this model the forecast itself, then that would in itself only as indicators of later dividends. Of imply that the forecast could be improved. course, the efficient marketsmodel does not Mathematically,it can be shown from the say p=p*. Might one still suppose that this theory of conditional expectations that u, kind of stock market crash was a rational must be uncorrelatedwith p,. mistake,a forecasterror that rationalpeople If one uses the principlefrom elementary mightmake? This paperwill explorehere the statisticsthat the varianceof the sum of two notion that the very volatility of p (i.e., the uncorrelatedvariables is the sum of their tendency of big movements in p to occur variances, one then has var(p*) var(u)+ again and again) implies that the answer is var(p). Since variancescannot be negative, no. this means var(p) ) ?var(p*) or, converting To give an idea of the kind of volatility to more easily interpretedstandard devia- comparisonsthat will be made here, let us tions, considerat this point the simplestinequality which puts limits on one measureof volatil- (1) (p or(P*) ity: the standarddeviation of p. The efficient marketsmodel can be describedas asserting This inequality (employed before in the VOL. 71 NO. 3 SHILLER: STOCK PRICES 423 papers by LeRoy and Porter and myself) is how restrictions implied by efficient markets violated dramatically by the data in Figures on the cross-covariance function of short- 1 and 2 as is immediately obvious in looking term and long-term interest rates imply in- at the figures.3 equality restrictions on the spectra of the This paper will develop the efficient long-term interest rate series which char- markets model in Section I to clarify some acterize the smoothness that the long rate theoretical questions that may arise in con- should display. In this paper, analogous im- nection with the inequality (1) and some plications are derived for the volatility of similar inequalities will be derived that put stock prices, although here a simpler and limits on the standard deviation of the in- more intuitively appealing discussion of the novation in price and the standard deviation model in terms of its innovation representa- of the change in price. The model is restated tion is used. This paper also has benefited in innovation form which allows better un- from the earlier discussion by LeRoy and derstanding of the limits on stock price Porter which independently derived some re- volatility imposed by the model. In particu- strictions on security price volatility implied lar, this will enable us to see (Section II) that by the efficient markets model and con- the standard deviation of tvp is highest when cluded that common stock prices are too information about dividends is revealed volatile to accord with the model. They ap- smoothly and that if information is revealed plied a methodology in some ways similar to in big lumps occasionally the price series that used here to study a stock price index may have higher kurtosis (fatter tails) but and individual stocks in a sample period will have lower variance. The notion ex- starting after World War II. pressed by some that earnings rather than It is somewhat inaccurate to say that this dividend data should be used is discussed in paper attempts to contradict the extensive Section III, and a way of assessing the im- literature of efficient markets (as, for exam- portance of time variation in real discount ple, Paul Cootner's volume on the random rates is shown in Section IV. The inequalities character of stock prices, or Eugene Fama's are compared with the data in Section V. survey).5 Most of this literature really ex- This paper takes as its starting point the amines different properties of security prices. approach I used earlier (1979) which showed Very little of the efficient markets literature evidence suggesting that long-term bond bears directly on the characteristic feature of yields are too volatile to accord with simple the model considered here: that expected expectations models of the term structure of real returns for the aggregate stock market interest rates.4 In that paper, it was shown are constant through time (or approximately so).
Recommended publications
  • Risk, Return, and the Overthrow of the Capital Asset Pricing Model Andrew West, CFA Manager, Investment Research
    Special Topics: Fundamental Research March 2014 Risk, Return, and the Overthrow of the Capital Asset Pricing Model Andrew West, CFA Manager, Investment Research Harding Loevner invests based on common-sense principles drawn Competitive advantage within a favorable industry structure is a from our founders’ experience: we stick to high-quality, growing prerequisite for durable profitability in a company. A company in companies that we can identify through fundamental research. This an industry with unfavorable dynamics has a much steeper chal- general philosophy flows naturally from our nature as cautious, pa- lenge than one well-positioned with few rivals and strong bargain- tient people. It has been a constant throughout our firm’s existence ing power over buyers and suppliers. But, we also require that our since it was founded in 1989. In contrast to the boring continuity of companies possess competitive advantages that will allow them to thought in our little community, the prevailing wisdom in the larger sustain superior levels of return over time. Our analysts are primarily world of academic investment theory has turned about completely organized by industry rather than by geography as we believe that over this same quarter century. Theories regarding market behavior the understanding of industry structure and peer groups is key to and investment outcomes that were proclaimed as essential verities identifying such investment opportunities. and celebrated with Nobel Prizes at the beginning of this period were subsequently overturned at the end. That academic battle is an en- Sustainable growth allows cash flow and earnings to compound as grossing tale that we have followed with interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Myron S. Scholes [Ideological Profiles of the Economics Laureates] Daniel B
    Myron S. Scholes [Ideological Profiles of the Economics Laureates] Daniel B. Klein, Ryan Daza, and Hannah Mead Econ Journal Watch 10(3), September 2013: 590-593 Abstract Myron S. Scholes is among the 71 individuals who were awarded the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel between 1969 and 2012. This ideological profile is part of the project called “The Ideological Migration of the Economics Laureates,” which fills the September 2013 issue of Econ Journal Watch. Keywords Classical liberalism, economists, Nobel Prize in economics, ideology, ideological migration, intellectual biography. JEL classification A11, A13, B2, B3 Link to this document http://econjwatch.org/file_download/766/ScholesIPEL.pdf ECON JOURNAL WATCH Schelling, Thomas C. 2007. Strategies of Commitment and Other Essays. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Schelling, Thomas C. 2013. Email correspondence with Daniel Klein, June 12. Schelling, Thomas C., and Morton H. Halperin. 1961. Strategy and Arms Control. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund. Myron S. Scholes by Daniel B. Klein, Ryan Daza, and Hannah Mead Myron Scholes (1941–) was born and raised in Ontario. His father, born in New York City, was a teacher in Rochester. He moved to Ontario to practice dentistry in 1930. Scholes’s mother moved as a young girl to Ontario from Russia and its pogroms (Scholes 2009a, 235). His mother and his uncle ran a successful chain of department stores. Scholes’s “first exposure to agency and contracting problems” was a family dispute that left his mother out of much of the business (Scholes 2009a, 235). In high school, he “enjoyed puzzles and financial issues,” succeeded in mathematics, physics, and biology, and subsequently was solicited to enter a engineering program by McMaster University (Scholes 2009a, 236-237).
    [Show full text]
  • Editor's Letter
    Why I Shall Miss Merton Miller Peter L. Bernstein erton Miller’s death received the proper somewhere,” he recalls. Miller was instrumental in tak- notices due a winner of the Nobel Prize, but ing Sharpe to the Quadrangle Club in Chicago, where Mthese reports emphasize the importance of he could present his ideas to faculty members like his intellectual contributions rather than his significance Miller, Lorie, and Fama. The invitation led to an as a human being. Nobody gives out Nobel Prizes for appointment to join the Chicago faculty, and Sharpe being a superior member of the human race, but Miller and his theories were on their way. would surely have been a laureate if someone had ever Miller’s role in launching the Black-Scholes- decided to create such a prize. Merton option pricing model was even more deter- Quite aside from the extraordinary insights gained mining. In October 1970, the three young scholars from Modigliani-Miller, we owe Merton Miller a deep had completed their work, and began the search for a debt of gratitude for his efforts to promote the careers journal that would publish it. “A Theoretical Valuation of young scholars whose little-noted innovations would Formula for Options, Warrants, and Other in time rock the world of finance. Works at the core of Securities”—subsequently given the more palatable modern investment theory might still be gathering dust title of “The Pricing of Options and Corporate somewhere—or might not even have been created— Liabilities”—was promptly rejected by Chicago’s by guest on October 1, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Monetary System: Quo Vadis
    Columbia University Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series The International Monetary System: Quo Vadis Robert A. Mundell Discussion Paper #:0102-34 Department of Economics Columbia University New York, NY 10027 March 2002 The International Monetary System: Quo Vadis Robert Mundell Columbia University February 8, 2001 Manuel Guitian Memorial Lecture, International Monetary Fund, February 8, 2001 I. Manuel Guitian Manuel Guitian was one of two brilliant students I met in 1965 at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva. Both went on to the University of Chicago for the Ph.D. program and to great distinction as economists. The other student was Rudiger Dornbusch. My students at Geneva were required to write a research paper on international monetary economics. Manuel and I agreed that he should look into the Poincare-Rist stabilization of the franc in 1926. That got him interested in exchange rate theory and it was an interest that persisted throughout his life. The quality of his analysis of that important episode from the inter-war years convinced me that Manuel had a good future as an economist and I encouraged him to go to Chicago for his Ph.D. University of Chicago Economics in the late 1960s was in one of its golden periods, maybe comparable to Vienna in the 1880s or Harvard, Chicago or Cambridge in the 1930s. There were Frank Knight (emeritus), Earl Hamilton (emeritus), Milton Friedman, Theodore Schultz, Harry Johnson, George Stigler, Hiro Uzawa, Arnold Harberger, Merton Miller, Bert Hoselitz, Robert Fogel, D. Gale Johnson, Gary Becker, Robert Aliber, Arthur Laffer, Stanley Fischer, Herbert Grubel, and myself.
    [Show full text]
  • Eugene F. Fama Booth School, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
    Two Pillars of Asset Pricing Prize Lecture, December 8, 2013 by Eugene F. Fama Booth School, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. he Nobel Foundation asks that the Prize lecture cover the work for which T the Prize is awarded. Te announcement of this year’s Prize cites empirical work in asset pricing. I interpret this to include work on efcient capital markets and work on developing and testing asset pricing models—the two pillars, or perhaps more descriptive, the Siamese twins of asset pricing. I start with ef- cient markets and then move on to asset pricing models. EFFICIENT CAPITAL MARKEts A. Early Work Te year 1962 was a propitious time for Ph.D. research at the University of Chi- cago. Computers were coming into their own, liberating econometricians from their mechanical calculators. It became possible to process large amounts of data quickly, at least by previous standards. Stock prices are among the most acces- sible data, and there was burgeoning interest in studying the behavior of stock returns, centered at the University of Chicago (Merton Miller, Harry Roberts, Lester Telser, and Benoit Mandelbrot as a frequent visitor) and MIT (Sidney Alexander, Paul Cootner, Franco Modigliani, and Paul Samuelson). Modigli- ani ofen visited Chicago to work with his longtime coauthor Merton Miller, so there was frequent exchange of ideas between the two schools. It was clear from the beginning that the central question is whether asset prices refect all available information—what I labeled the efcient markets hy- pothesis (Fama 1965b). Te difculty is making the hypothesis testable. We can’t 365 6490_Book.indb 365 11/4/14 2:30 PM 366 The Nobel Prizes test whether the market does what it is supposed to do unless we specify what it is supposed to do.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Pillars of Asset Pricing †
    American Economic Review 2014, 104(6): 1467–1485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.6.1467 Two Pillars of Asset Pricing † By Eugene F. Fama * The Nobel Foundation asks that the Nobel lecture cover the work for which the Prize is awarded. The announcement of this year’s Prize cites empirical work in asset pricing. I interpret this to include work on efficient capital markets and work on developing and testing asset pricing models—the two pillars, or perhaps more descriptive, the Siamese twins of asset pricing. I start with efficient markets and then move on to asset pricing models. I. Efficient Capital Markets A. Early Work The year 1962 was a propitious time for PhD research at the University of Chicago. Computers were coming into their own, liberating econometricians from their mechanical calculators. It became possible to process large amounts of data quickly, at least by previous standards. Stock prices are among the most accessible data, and there was burgeoning interest in studying the behavior of stock returns, cen- tered at the University of Chicago Merton Miller, Harry Roberts, Lester Telser, and ( Benoit Mandelbrot as a frequent visitor and MIT Sidney Alexander, Paul Cootner, ) ( Franco Modigliani, and Paul Samuelson . Modigliani often visited Chicago to work ) with his longtime coauthor Merton Miller, so there was frequent exchange of ideas between the two schools. It was clear from the beginning that the central question is whether asset prices reflect all available information—what I labelled the efficient markets hypothesis Fama 1965b . The difficulty is making the hypothesis testable. We can’t test whether ( ) the market does what it is supposed to do unless we specify what it is supposed to do.
    [Show full text]
  • Ideological Profiles of the Economics Laureates · Econ Journal Watch
    Discuss this article at Journaltalk: http://journaltalk.net/articles/5811 ECON JOURNAL WATCH 10(3) September 2013: 255-682 Ideological Profiles of the Economics Laureates LINK TO ABSTRACT This document contains ideological profiles of the 71 Nobel laureates in economics, 1969–2012. It is the chief part of the project called “Ideological Migration of the Economics Laureates,” presented in the September 2013 issue of Econ Journal Watch. A formal table of contents for this document begins on the next page. The document can also be navigated by clicking on a laureate’s name in the table below to jump to his or her profile (and at the bottom of every page there is a link back to this navigation table). Navigation Table Akerlof Allais Arrow Aumann Becker Buchanan Coase Debreu Diamond Engle Fogel Friedman Frisch Granger Haavelmo Harsanyi Hayek Heckman Hicks Hurwicz Kahneman Kantorovich Klein Koopmans Krugman Kuznets Kydland Leontief Lewis Lucas Markowitz Maskin McFadden Meade Merton Miller Mirrlees Modigliani Mortensen Mundell Myerson Myrdal Nash North Ohlin Ostrom Phelps Pissarides Prescott Roth Samuelson Sargent Schelling Scholes Schultz Selten Sen Shapley Sharpe Simon Sims Smith Solow Spence Stigler Stiglitz Stone Tinbergen Tobin Vickrey Williamson jump to navigation table 255 VOLUME 10, NUMBER 3, SEPTEMBER 2013 ECON JOURNAL WATCH George A. Akerlof by Daniel B. Klein, Ryan Daza, and Hannah Mead 258-264 Maurice Allais by Daniel B. Klein, Ryan Daza, and Hannah Mead 264-267 Kenneth J. Arrow by Daniel B. Klein 268-281 Robert J. Aumann by Daniel B. Klein, Ryan Daza, and Hannah Mead 281-284 Gary S. Becker by Daniel B.
    [Show full text]
  • A Father of Modern Finance
    A Father of Modern Finance Eugene F. Fama, the consummate researcher in his 50 years at Booth, changed the way generations look at the stock market. His rigorous standards have elevated the work of students and colleagues. By Rebecca Rolfes An undergraduate at Tufts University in 1959, Eugene F. Fama,, had moved on from a major in French to economics and was a newlywed in need of an income. The late Harry Ernst, an economics professor who had a stock market forecasting service on the side, hired Fama to devise ways to anticipate changes in stock market prices. The formulas Fama came up with worked with historical data but never worked when he tested them going forward. It took him a while to figure out the problem, but when he did, he reshaped finance. Fama, by 1964 a PhD student at Chicago Booth, figured out that you can't beat the market because prices already incorporate the information in easily available signals. Competing traders will seize on any reliable piece of information that prices will rise tomorrow and bid up prices today until they reflect that knowledge. Fama quickly realized that this simple insight had important and unanticipated implications for finance. His dissertation, "The Behavior of Stock Market Prices," followed by "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," published in the Journal of Finance in 1970, revolutionized empirical work in finance and the understanding of financial markets. Fama's work provides the intellectual underpinnings for passively-managed and indexed mutual funds - paving the way for a new approach to investing.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2006 a BRIEF HISTORY of the CAPITAL ASSET PRICING MODEL Edward J. Sullivan, Lebanon Valley College
    A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CAPITAL ASSET PRICING MODEL Edward J. Sullivan, Lebanon Valley College ABSTRACT This paper explores the near-simultaneous development of the capital asset pricing model by four men: Jack Treynor, William Sharpe, John Lintner, and Jan Mossin. Further, it identifies the key ideas that inspired the research of these men. Lastly, it considers why the work of only one of them resulted in a Noble Prize in economic science. INTRODUCTION mean-variance efficient portfolio, one needs to calculate the variance-covariance matrix with N(N- The history of scientific thought is replete 1)/2 elements. Thus, a reasonably sized portfolio of with examples of individuals who independently and 100 securities requires the daunting task calculating simultaneously discover the same concept. 4,950 variances or covariances. Markowitz Undoubtedly, the most famous example of such a suggested a possible solution to this problem by coincidence is the development of calculus by both proposing a “single index model” (now referred to in Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz in the the literature as a one-factor model). Indeed, it was seventeenth century. Such examples are considerably this idea that involved William Sharpe with less common in the history of economic thought. Markowitz and put Sharpe on a line of research that However, during the early 1960s, four economists -- culminated in his version of CAPM. John Lintner (1965a, b), Jan Mossin (1966), William Sharpe (1964), and Jack Treynor (1962) -- developed The other paper which motivated essentially the same model for describing security researchers is Franco Modigliani and Merton Miller’s returns.
    [Show full text]
  • Finance and Growth: Theory and Evidence
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES FINANCE AND GROWTH: THEORY AND EVIDENCE Ross Levine Working Paper 10766 http://www.nber.org/papers/w10766 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 September 2004 This paper is being prepared for the Handbook of Economic Growth. Philippe Aghion, Thorsten Beck, John Boyd, Maria Carkovic, Asli Demirguc-Kunt, John Kareken, Luc Laeven, Raghu Rajan, Bruce Smith, and Luigi Zingales provided helpful comments. The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Bureau of Economic Research. ©2004 by Ross Levine. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Finance and Growth: Theory and Evidence Ross Levine NBER Working Paper No. 10766 September 2004 JEL No. G0, O0 ABSTRACT This paper reviews, appraises, and critiques theoretical and empirical research on the connections between the operation of the financial system and economic growth. While subject to ample qualifications and countervailing views, the preponderance of evidence suggests that both financial intermediaries and markets matter for growth and that reverse causality alone is not driving this relationship. Furthermore, theory and evidence imply that better developed financial systems ease external financing constraints facing firms, which illuminates one mechanism through which financial development influences economic growth. The paper highlights many areas needing additional research. Ross Levine Carlson School of Management University of Minnesota 321 19th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55455 and NBER [email protected] 1 I. Introduction Economists disagree sharply about the role of the financial sector in economic growth.
    [Show full text]
  • NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ECONOMIC IMPERIALISM Edward
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ECONOMIC IMPERIALISM Edward P. Lazear Working Paper 7300 http://www.nber.org/papers/w7300 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 August 1999 This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation through the NBER. I am grateful to Kenneth Arrow, James Baron, Gary Becker, Roger Faith, Claudia Goldin, Morley Gunderson, Larry Katz, Robert Lucas, Michael Schwartz, Andrei Shleifer, and Nancy Stokey for helpful comments and discussions. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Bureau of Economic Research. © 1999 by Edward P. Lazear. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Economic Imperialism Edward P. Lazear NBER Working Paper No. 7300 August 1999 ABSTRACT Economics is not only a social science, it is a genuine science. Like the physical sciences, economics uses a methodology that produces refutable implications and tests these implications using solid statistical techniques. In particular, economics stresses three factors that distinguish it from other social sciences. Economists use the construct of rational individuals who engage in maximizing behavior. Economic models adhere strictly to the importance of equilibrium as part of any theory. Finally, a focus on efficiency leads economists to ask questions that other social sciences ignore. These ingredients have allowed economics to invade intellectual territory that was previously deemed to be outside the discipline’s realm. Edward P. Lazear Graduate School of Business Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-5015 and NBER [email protected] Edward P.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Release
    The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 1990 Harry M. Markowitz, Merton H. Miller, William F. Sharpe Share this: 86 86 Share Press Release 16 October 1990 THIS YEAR'S LAUREATES ARE PIONEERS IN THE THEORY OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS AND CORPORATE FINANCE The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the 1990 Alfred Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with one third each, to Professor Harry Markowitz, City University of New York, USA, Professor Merton Miller, University of Chicago, USA, Professor William Sharpe, Stanford University, USA, for their pioneering work in the theory of financial economics. Harry Markowitz is awarded the Prize for having developed the theory of portfolio choice; William Sharpe, for his contributions to the theory of price formation for financial assets, the so-called, Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM); and Merton Miller, for his fundamental contributions to the theory of corporate finance. Summary Financial markets serve a key purpose in a modern market economy by allocating productive resources among various areas of production. It is to a large extent through financial markets that saving in different sectors of the economy is transferred to firms for investments in buildings and machines. Financial markets also reflect firms' expected prospects and risks, which implies that risks can be spread and that savers and investors can acquire valuable information for their investment decisions. The first pioneering contribution in the field of financial economics was made in the 1950s by Harry Markowitz who developed a theory for households' and firms' allocation of financial assets under uncertainty, the so-called theory of portfolio choice.
    [Show full text]