New Rank in Economics

[Mr.Keen]

It looks reasonable to me too, although I would put NWU over MIT and Harvard out of that list. (Just my personal opinon)

[italos]

Originally Posted by bojangles42124

...for mathematical and quantitative methods, I think that's pretty reasonable. I've heard that UCSD and Yale are THE places to go for econometric theory.

Oh yes for metrics I would put UCSD first!For me it is the number one in the world with two Nobel prise in the department.Not sure how active is now days Engle but..... I thought it was an overall ranking of the Departments. Mr Keen is also right.

[Golden Rule]

Actually, Engle's been at NYU Stern for a few years now. Besides, counting Nobel Prizes among currrent faculty is not a particularly useful way to judge a department. By that criteria, MIT is tied for the worst department in the country, and Columbia (with three) is close to the top.

[israelecon]

golden rule is obviously right. nobel prizes are usually given to people way past their prime and often retired (with some exceptions of course). also, many schools try to hire nobel prize winners, so that they can make exactly italos' claim, even though in terms of actual current research they add little value. maybe a better way to use nobel prizes for ranking is how many future nobel prize winners there are in a department, but that ranking obviously won't help us now.

[italos]

Originally Posted by israelecon

golden rule is obviously right. nobel prizes are usually given to people way past their prime and often retired (with some exceptions of course). also, many schools try to hire nobel prize winners, so that they can make exactly italos' claim, even though in terms of actual current research they add little value. maybe a better way to use nobel prizes for ranking is how many future nobel prize winners there are in a department, but that ranking obviously won't help us now.

You maybe right on this.Nobel prise winners add prestige at an department.On the other hand, Nobel prise award in economics generally are given to people over the age of 60-65 or close to that age.
But how you estimate how many future Nobel prize winners are there in a department?The only way I can figure is try to estimate the quality of research being done in a department.In other worlds if in a department high quality research is being produced then you may presume that in the future at least one Nobel prise winner might come up.Simultaneously, department's rankings will go up.In this sense there is a positive correlation between research quality and rankings

[jenizaro]

I don't think departments hire Nobel Prize winners only to brag about them, though obviuosly this is part of the reason. However, even when not very active, Nobel Prize winners possess superior judgment capacity to discern good from bad research. So, having a NP winner with whom to discuss ideas is a great benefit for the other members of one such department.

[Naske]

found this, seems like a new paper dealing with rankings

http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/...71?cookieSet=1

[econphilomath]

Originally Posted by Naske

found this, seems like a new paper dealing with rankings

MIT Press - Cookie absent

I liked the table showing how California has more articles, journals and authors than every country in Europe besides the UK. Ouch..

[bango]

Where are international universities?

[vivek31]

I don't agree with Israelecon at all. I don't think there is one ranking of economics departments published in AER or JPE. All rankings are generally published in lower ranked journals (people care about them but rankings are not top articles), so discrediting this ranking because it is in SEJ is not fair. There are famous rankings in Economic Inquiry, Journal of European Association that are both good journals but are not the AER. If someone does not like this ranking because the school he is going to is low, well this is not a fair reason to discredit the ranking.