Ideas are nonrival, so increasing returns to scale is an essential feature of technological change in a market economy.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Fixed costs & market power in tech are a fact of life. But this need not correspond to simple IRS b/o duplication & business/idea stealing
|
||||
 Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I don't know what "essential" means. And ideas are rival in a market economy with a patent system.
|
||||
 Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Spoiler alert: Anti-science is especially dumb
|
||||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Yes, if you mean that Af(x) has increasing returns in A and x. Not restricted to market economies. Generation, copy of ideas is important.
|
||||
 Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
An idea is non-rival and having one requires a large upfront cost (as in discovering the cure to a disease). Increasing returns follows.
|
||||
 Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This also means large potential gains to globalization.
-see background information here -see background information here |
||||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
One of the central insights of economics.
|
||||
 Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The increasing returns created by nonrival ideas is perhaps the leading contender for explaining economic growth.
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
True if we assume, as it seems natural, that doubling all rivalrous inputs doubles output.
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The key point is that developing an idea is a fixed cost, not that ideas are nonrival.
Conclusion also follows if ideas do not transfer.
|
||||
 Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 James Stock |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is the key source of improving material well-being over time; disruptive as it can be.
|
||||
