Support the Café

Search our Site

Economics Nobel for saving lives

Economics Nobel for saving lives

This year’s Nobel prize in economics went to Al Roth and Lloyd Shapley for their work on markets without prices and the application of that work to real world problems.

The most significant application is Roth’s work on kidney-exchanges. Society finds the buying and selling of kidneys as repugnant and prohibits it. Yet transplants save lives, and people die for lack of a willing donor.

Joshua Gans explains.

As documented in this long profile in the Boston Globe, instead of lamenting, Al Roth took the inability to use prices as a constraint …. He asked if kidney exchanges could work without prices? And the answer was yes. What you had to recognise was that you had a set of willing donors and a set of recipients. The issue was that it took luck for a willing donor to be in the same family as a recipient. But what did not take luck was the notion that a willing donor may match one recipient while the family member of that recipient may match the donor’s loved one. You just had to bring those people together. Basically, add some search and some safety (you don’t want people opting out once their own family member has received a kidney) and you are off the races. Put simply, Roth’s kidney exchange is up and running. Here is an economic theorist who hasn’t just made things more efficient. He has actually saved lives. It is unclear whether it is the economics Nobel he deserved or the Nobel prize for medicine.

There are many things society finds repugnant. Here’s an accessible paper by Roth on repugnance. He considers a host of examples. What sets off our repugnance buttons? Should it?

Do you want a marriage market for heterosexuals which matches couples and doesn’t result in divorce? Shapley and Roth proved there is such a market in theory and it looks a lot like the traditional one where men do the proposing and women the accepting. You can give is a try here.

The allocation of residents to hospital used to be plagued by misallocation and waste. Roth offered a solution that has been widely adopted and works well. He has modified it over time to allow for married resident couples. The list goes on. Like fixing the NFL draft.

Arindrajit Dube argues this prize was for economic planning (as opposed to the alternative of a market economy).


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café