The following article first appeared in the INOMICS Handbook 2022. Download the INOMICS Handbook Professor Marcel Fratzscher, esteemed macroeconomist and president of the DIW Berlin, once again asks questions about economics and life in general to a peer in the 2022 edition of the INOMICS Handbook Questionnaire. This time, he has the pleasure of being joined by renowned economic historian Adam Tooze, who generously agreed to take the hot seat in this exchange. Thus, the back-and-forth has been dubbed Fratzscher vs. Tooze, as is tradition. What follows is a dive into the beauty of wild places, the gender bias still present in economics, the link between policy makers and central banks, the limits of the search for perfect causality in the social sciences, and even more. Tooze’s perspective is unique and fresh, and is sure to be an interesting read you won’t want to miss.

Klaus Teuber’s Settlers of Catan is a popular board game that has become a mainstay of friendly gatherings across the globe. For the uninitiated, in Catan up to 4 players compete to be the first one with 10 victory points. Points are gained by building houses (“settlements”), cities, and roads on a heretofore unsettled island rife with natural resources. Catan has nearly limitless replay value - with 3,695,814,682,560,000 (over 3 quadrillion!) different unique board layouts using just the base rules. Chances are, you’ve heard of Catan even if you don’t particularly love board games.

The following article first appeared in the INOMICS Handbook 2022. Download the INOMICS Handbook While every generation claims its problems are the most formidable and pressing in the annals of humankind, our generation certainly has a strong case: a global pandemic that has already taken five million lives, and a world seemingly headed toward catastrophe, unable to keep global temperatures from rising and thus contain climate change.

The following article first appeared in the INOMICS Handbook 2021. Download the INOMICS Handbook On a visit to the London School of Economics in November 2008, the Queen asked her hosts why no one had seen the financial crisis coming. It took the professors nine months to come up with an excuse, put forth in a letter in July 2009:

Now in their sixth year, the INOMICS Awards remain unique in their celebration of institutions committed to the career development of economists worldwide.

For as long as we can remember, Mother Nature has been serving mankind as our major root source of livelihood. From the land that provides the nutrients for our crops, to the stone for our roads and buildings, to the oil for transport in our globalized world, we rely on these natural resources to maintain our modern way of life.

Esteemed economist, Berkeley Professor, and friend of INOMICS, Edward Miguel generously took time out of his busy schedule to take part in the fourth INOMICS Handbook Questionnaire. Opposite him in his customary role of quizmaster was Professor Marcel Fratzscher, president of the DIW Berlin, and one of Germany’s leading voices in macroeconomics. Observing tradition, and as a nod to those involved, the encounter has been dubbed ‘Fratzscher v Miguel’.  What took place was both in-depth and personal, the conversation ranging from the beauty of Hawaii and gender bias in economics, all the way to wealth taxes and COVID-19. For anyone connected to economics, especially those starting out, this one is not to be missed.  

Humanity’s evolving nature has propelled it up the food chain, from prey to planetary predator. Just 60,000 years ago, homo sapiens roamed the earth, insignificant and insecure, their existence of little consequence. Life, as Thomas Hobbes put it, was ‘nasty, brutish, and short’. Fast forward to the present and man’s mark is unmistakable, the dawn of the ‘anthropocene’ testament to mesmerizing advances in technology - and a masochistic disregard for our ecosystems.

Production is interaction of man and nature  Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation

A historic tragedy like the war in Ukraine calls for historic measures of outreach and solidarity. There is an urgent demand for humanitarian aid and safe passage for the hundreds of thousands of refugees already created by the war. This includes thousands of students at Ukranian universities who have had to flee the conflict.

​Supply-side economics. Since its conception in the 1970s, debating its merits – or lack thereof – has been at the heart of political discourse, demarcating Republican from Democrat, Tory loyalist from Labour devotee, and informing not just an economic outlook, but a world view. 

The holidays are coming and Christmas is just around the corner. If you want to avoid last-minute panic-present-buying, you had better get to planning the gifts you'll be giving.

Economics isn't something that can only be learned from books and journals – in fact, as an important part of modern life, there are a number of great movies made about economic themes. From the 2008 financial crisis to the formation of game theory, movies have documented a variety of subjects that will be of interest to economists. Next time you're selecting a movie for your movie night, try one of these 10 films that economists will love.

Even before COVID-19, students across the world face a mental health crisis of unprecedented proportions. Columnist James Matthew Alston investigated the phenomenon, looking particularly at university responses - his conclusions made for tough reading. Many institutions are overwhelmed, their mental health services ill-equipped to cope with the growing demand. Consequently, students are often left untreated in precarious states of mental health – an unsustainable situation that, as the statistics show, can end tragically.

The following article is an analysis of data taken from the INOMICS Salary Report 2020/21 - which is available to download in full here. Specifically, this article looks at the average salaries of economists around the world working in academia, the public sector and the private sector. It is the first instalment in a series of insights handling the Report’s findings.

'The greatest science policy failure for a generation’ is how the editor of The Lancet, Richard Horton, described the UK’s COVID response last June. It was a widely shared sentiment  – made credible by the UK having one of the highest death rates in the western world. Fast forward to the present, and the government has finally claimed a ‘much needed win’ – a big one, too. Its vaccination programme has been rolled out with remarkable swiftness, and the country’s vulnerable populations are well on their way to inoculation. Commentators of every stripe have taken note.

The internet has given us many things: unlimited information, ever-expanding interconnection, myriad means of procrastination - in some places it’s even helped birth democracy. But as one hand giveth, the other, as is often the case, taketh away. And in the UK, it looks like the gift of online shopping may come at the expense of our high streets - and the thousands of livelihoods they maintain.

​Development aid: what is it good for? Well, according to much research the answer may well be absolutely nothing. In fact, it may well be worse than nothing. When judged against its aim of ‘instigating economic development and alleviating poverty’, its record is so dismal it looks as though aid actually hinders the achievement of its own stated goals. And the curious thing is this seems to be something of an open secret. Even to an untrained eye the big numbers pertaining to development aid don’t look right. Take Africa, for example. Over $1 trillion dollars has been pumped into the continent in the last 50 years, and how much has it benefited? How many African countries are actually in a better condition now than they were before receiving aid?

Few would contest it has been the ideology of our political age. Ever since the 1980s, it has dominated western politics, underpinning governance, influencing culture, and leaving its indelible mark across society. During this time its core tenets were rarely challenged and only its peripheral aspects tweaked. The 2008 financial crash, however, changed this, shaking confidence in an ideology whose name, up until that point, was rarely ever spoken. With the loss of savings, skyrocketing inequality and falling living standards that followed, people wanted answers and began to question the system that had facilitated such a disaster.

2021 began not only with an understanding that COVID-19 restrictions would likely continue for some time, but that the effects of Brexit – Great Britain leaving European Union – would also start to be felt. That Brexit would bring about changes to the UK/EU border was known for months. And yet, when it happened, most of the carriers and state institutions were not ready, creating (or rather, extending) the chaos in ports and near the Eurotunnel.

The current moment is one defined by crisis. It can be found everywhere: in the climate, economy, mental health, even in democracy. It’s so ubiquitous as to have almost become the new norm. Amid the chaos, politics has struggled to keep up, its landscape is in permanent shift, its rulebook long thrown away. New formations have emerged, metastasized, sometimes died, and occasionally taken over - developments often surprising and hard to make sense of. What’s clear, though, is that polarisation has set in. From Bernie to Bolsanaro, from Modi to Make America Great Again, the voices now heard, the names that fill newspaper columns, are reminding us just how wide the political spectrum is. For many, it's a terrifying prospect, for others, it’s a thrilling and necessary reset. For the centre, as developments in the US and UK are showing, it may well spell death. 

As claims go, Francis Fukuyama’s insistence that history’s run its course has aged rather badly. The ascent of China, the Great Recession, spiralling inequality across the West, and now COVID-19, have all, in their own way, undermined his notion that capitalist liberal democracy is the political endgame. If anything, political choice seems to be expanding. People are increasingly being offered the opportunity to continue with capitalism, occasionally of the nativist variety and sometimes strictly neoliberal, or, alternatively, to try a little socialism.

The damage wrought by COVID, far from equalising, has been pointedly prejudiced. While the virus itself may struggle to differentiate between people, the world in which it operates has no such problem. Indeed, its structures have ensured COVID’s disruption of employment has fallen unevenly across regions - the experience of economists a case in point. Data from the forthcoming INOMICS’ Salary Report speaks to this directly, revealing the relationship between where one works - specifically in which country - and the level of vocational dislocation.

That the world of work has radically changed we know, we see it before our eyes: kitchens have replaced offices; pajamas, suits; and housemates often now fill the space previously occupied by colleagues. But how have these changes - and others - been felt by economists around the world? Through a textual analysis undertaken in the INOMICS Salary Survey, we answer that question and, in doing so, paint an anecdotal picture of economists’ COVID experience.