International Economics

The 2024 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson for “studies of how institutions are...

A new study by Utpal Bhattacharya, Tse-Chun Lin, and Janghoon Shon finds that Hong Kong's 2020 National Security Law led local financial analysts to...

Utsav Gandhi relates recent developments in the American government’s ban on TikTok and shows how the case maps over broader debates about conflicts between...

The ongoing debates about the EU’s competition policy have predominantly focused on Western Europe, overlooking the dynamic growth and unique challenges of Central and Eastern Europe, writes Maciej Bernatt and Kati Cseres. This oversight risks deepening economic disparities and undermining the EU’s goals of unity, democracy, and innovation-driven growth.

Despite fundamental changes in the real economy, and strides in the regulation of privacy, data, and digital markets, antitrust practice and discourse in Europe are still conducted in “safe spaces” where the antitrust community resists change and remains attached to neoliberal approaches and efficiency goals. But the Trump Administration will not just signify a wholesale return to pre-NeoBrandeisian times (as many in Europe hope): indeed Europeans hiding in their “safe spaces” may well be surprised, writes Cristina Caffarra.

In Europe, many regulatory authorities are debating whether to loosen regulations on tech companies so that they can catch up with their counterparts in the United States and close Europe’s innovation gap. Based on her recent article, Anu Bradford shows that this choice is a false one. She argues that rather than stringent regulation, the gap in tech innovation between the U.S. and EU can be explained by differences in their scaling opportunities, capital markets, bankruptcy laws, immigration policy, and flexibility of their labor markets.

Stigler Center Assistant Director of Programs Matthew Lucky traces the history of ideas about population growth and its relation to welfare from Malthusian concerns of a population bomb to contemporary studies correlating declining birth rates in developed countries with increased investments in human capital and GDP per capita. Scholars now debate what it means for a society to have populations that do not simply stop growing, but rapidly shrink.

From collaborator to commentator, economist Leopoldo Fergusson offers a unique perspective on his work with recent Nobel laureates in economics. Fergusson reflects on their groundbreaking research on institutions, political incentives, and social norms, while providing personal insights into the brilliance and generosity of James Robinson and Daron Acemoglu.

Democracy sees higher GDP due to greater civil liberties, economic reform, increased investment and government capacity, and reduced social conflict. This post originally appeared...

Bruno Pellegrino introduces a novel model developed with Enrico Spolaore and Romain Wacziarg that explains the lack of international investment in some countries despite their promise of higher returns. The study finds that removing certain barriers to international capital flows could boost global GDP by 7% and significantly reduce cross-country inequality.