Eulogy on Harold
Demsetz
Kam-Ming Wan
School of Accounting and Finance
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
January 12, 2019
The Economics profession has lost a giant when Professor Harold
Demsetz passed away on January 4, 2019. He was 88 years old. Harold was
influential in many fields of economics including Law and Economics, Economics
of organization, and Industrial Organization. Like Armen Alchian, Arnold
Harberger, Jack Hirshleifer, and Ben Klein, he was the heart and soul of the Economics
Department at UCLA.
Harold’s papers are original and highly influential. His most
well-known article is “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization,”
with Armen Alchian. This article uses the difficulty of metering input
productivity and rewards to explain the structure of economic organization. This
paper was one of the most cited papers in Economics and was selected as a “top
20” article in the past century published in the American Economic Review. To demonstrate its prestige, 70% of the “top
20” articles are written by Nobel laureates.
His contributions in Economics have been extensively written
about and deeply appreciated. The best summary of his contributions is available
from the American Economic Association (AEA) website (https://www.aeaweb.org/about-aea/honors-awards/distinguished-fellows/harold-demsetz)
when he was named the distinguished fellow of AEA in 2013:
“Harold Demsetz is one of the most creative and deep
microeconomists of the 20th century. Several of his contributions
anticipated subsequent research by years or even decades, and have offered
unusually insightful analyses of fundamental problems of economic theory.
Like Armen Alchian, his best works were monumental and
important to all fields of Economics. Many people in the profession believe
that the duo (Armen Alchian and Harold Demsetz) deserved to win the Nobel Prize
for their contributions to the theory of the firm and the economics of property
rights. In private conversations, this sentiment was echoed by Professor Gary
Becker (Nobel laureate in Economics in 1992) when he visited the University of
Hong Kong in 2010 and Professor Ray Ball (University of Chicago) when he gave a
keynote speech at the JIAR conference in Sao Paulo in 2015. Sadly, this recognition never came to either one
of them.
Nevertheless, Harold’s influences on mentoring PhD students were less extensively discussed. Back in the old days at UCLA, Harold mentored many PhD students. Many graduate students harbored the impression that Harold was tough and occasionally intimidating, especially his Chicago-style penetrating questions during workshops. I recalled an incident when John Lott (then affiliated with University of Chicago) presented a paper at UCLA, Harold asked him a fundamental question which John paused for 10-15 seconds. Harold immediately commented in a half-jokingly manner: “you are too slow and how can you survive in Chicago?” Students raised their eyebrows for his rigor on the speaker.
However, I have a completely different view of Harold. The following is a true story. In 1993, I was admitted to the doctoral program in Economics at UCLA. However, there was a problem because UCLA did not offer me any scholarship. Because pursuing a doctoral program at UCLA was my dream, I decided to roll a dice. With enormous support from my family, friends and HKU mentors, I raised just sufficient funding to survive the first year at UCLA.
Due to the financial hardship, I was nervous and under tremendous pressure to perform at UCLA. But, unnecessary pressure is bad for good research, especially for nurturing original ideas which Armen Alchian and Harold Demsetz knew and knew it well. To lessen my financial constraint, the duo “adopted” me. Armen told me to do two things: first “to relax” and second “you are too skinny and eat more.” Then, Harold followed up and fed me: literally by hiring me as his research assistant; and intellectually by showing me how to do research. Even after I had received departmental funding, Harold continued to feed me until the day I graduated.
Harold also took me under his wing and served as my dissertation chair. He held high standards on research and loved to discuss original ideas. Nevertheless, he had low tolerance on poor writing. I fondly recalled an incident. In my final year, I needed to present my dissertation in the IO workshop. Knowing that Harold had high standards on writing and I am a non-native speaker, I spent countless of hours writing (and revising) my dissertation, hoping to impress him. I also begged two of my classmates, who are native speakers graduated from Harvard, to proof read my dissertation. However, shortly after I finished my introduction in the workshop, Harold jumped in and criticized my writing in front of everyone. I was truly embarrassed, dejected and wanted to find a place to hide.
A few days later, Harold summoned me to his office and showed me my dissertation full of pencil markings. Armen did the same thing subsequently. I read (and re-read) their markings many times and realized they were excellent corrections. Since then, I wake up every morning and think about the duo and whether my writing is clear enough to satisfy their standards. In retrospect, I am grateful to Harold for this incident and his fatherly-like honesty to make me a better writer and scholar.
Nevertheless, Harold’s influences on mentoring PhD students were less extensively discussed. Back in the old days at UCLA, Harold mentored many PhD students. Many graduate students harbored the impression that Harold was tough and occasionally intimidating, especially his Chicago-style penetrating questions during workshops. I recalled an incident when John Lott (then affiliated with University of Chicago) presented a paper at UCLA, Harold asked him a fundamental question which John paused for 10-15 seconds. Harold immediately commented in a half-jokingly manner: “you are too slow and how can you survive in Chicago?” Students raised their eyebrows for his rigor on the speaker.
However, I have a completely different view of Harold. The following is a true story. In 1993, I was admitted to the doctoral program in Economics at UCLA. However, there was a problem because UCLA did not offer me any scholarship. Because pursuing a doctoral program at UCLA was my dream, I decided to roll a dice. With enormous support from my family, friends and HKU mentors, I raised just sufficient funding to survive the first year at UCLA.
Due to the financial hardship, I was nervous and under tremendous pressure to perform at UCLA. But, unnecessary pressure is bad for good research, especially for nurturing original ideas which Armen Alchian and Harold Demsetz knew and knew it well. To lessen my financial constraint, the duo “adopted” me. Armen told me to do two things: first “to relax” and second “you are too skinny and eat more.” Then, Harold followed up and fed me: literally by hiring me as his research assistant; and intellectually by showing me how to do research. Even after I had received departmental funding, Harold continued to feed me until the day I graduated.
Harold also took me under his wing and served as my dissertation chair. He held high standards on research and loved to discuss original ideas. Nevertheless, he had low tolerance on poor writing. I fondly recalled an incident. In my final year, I needed to present my dissertation in the IO workshop. Knowing that Harold had high standards on writing and I am a non-native speaker, I spent countless of hours writing (and revising) my dissertation, hoping to impress him. I also begged two of my classmates, who are native speakers graduated from Harvard, to proof read my dissertation. However, shortly after I finished my introduction in the workshop, Harold jumped in and criticized my writing in front of everyone. I was truly embarrassed, dejected and wanted to find a place to hide.
A few days later, Harold summoned me to his office and showed me my dissertation full of pencil markings. Armen did the same thing subsequently. I read (and re-read) their markings many times and realized they were excellent corrections. Since then, I wake up every morning and think about the duo and whether my writing is clear enough to satisfy their standards. In retrospect, I am grateful to Harold for this incident and his fatherly-like honesty to make me a better writer and scholar.
Even after my graduation,
Harold was always standing on my shoulder and gave me useful advice in research
and life until mid-2017. Harold was a warm, funny and very kind man. He tried
to help me and other graduate students in every possible ways, like a father
does to his child. I am delighted that Harold had lived a full and meaningful life. But, I am truly sad that he left us this early. He will be sorely missed.
哈羅德*德姆塞茨教授的悼詞
尹錦銘
香港理工大學會計及金融學院助理教授
2019年1月12日
當哈羅德*德姆塞茨教授於2019年1月4日去世時，經濟學界已經失去了一個巨人。他是88歲。哈羅德在許多經濟學領域有影響力，包括法律和經濟學，組織經濟學和工業組織。像阿爾欽(Armen Alchian)，阿諾德*哈伯格爾(Arnold
Harberger)，傑克*赫什萊弗(Jack Hirshleifer)，本傑明*克萊因(Ben
Klein)，他是加州大學洛杉磯分校的經濟學系的心臟和靈魂。
哈羅德的論文是原創和極具影響力的。他最著名的文章是與Armen Alchian的
"生產，信息成本和經濟組織"。這文利用計量投入的難度、生產率和報酬來解釋經濟組織的結構。這文是經濟學中引用最多的論文之一，並被選為在過去的一個世紀發表在美國經濟評論的"top20"文章。為了彰顯其威信，"20強"的70%由諾貝爾獎得主撰寫。
他在經濟學方面的貢獻被廣泛地寫入，並深為讚賞。他的貢獻最好的總結可從美國經濟協會（AEA）網站（https://www.aeaweb.org/about-aea/honors-awards/distinguished-fellows/harold-demsetz）當他在2013年被任命為AEA的傑出研究員時:
"Harold
Demsetz是20世紀最有創意和最深刻的微觀經濟學家之一。 他的幾個貢獻預期隨後的研究多年甚至幾十年，並提供了經濟理論的基本問題異常有見地的分析。"
像Armen Alchian一樣，他最好的作品對所有的經濟學領域都是巨大的和重要的。許多行內人認為，二人（阿爾欽Alchian和哈羅德Demsetz）應該得到諾貝爾獎，他們對公司的理論和財產權利的經濟學的貢獻巨大。在私人談話中，這一情緒得到了1992年諾貝爾經濟學獎得主Gary Becker 教授和芝加哥大學Ray
Ball教授的同意。可悲的是，他們都沒有獲得過諾貝爾獎。
然而，哈羅德對指導博士生的影響不那麼廣泛討論。早在過去的日子在加州大學洛杉磯分校，哈羅德輔導許多博士生。許多研究生的印像是，哈羅德是艱難的，偶爾嚇人，尤其是他芝加哥式的問題。我回憶起一件事，當約翰*洛特（當時隸屬於芝加哥大學）在加州大學洛杉磯分校出席一個研究研討會，哈羅德問他一個根本性的問題，約翰停頓了10-15秒。哈羅德立即以半開玩笑的方式評論說："你太慢了，你怎麼能在芝加哥生存？"
學生意識到他對研討會講者的高要求。
但是，我對哈羅德的看法完全不同。以下是一個真實的故事。 1993年，我被加州大學洛杉磯分校經濟學博士課程錄取。然而，我有財政困難，因為加州大學洛杉磯分校沒有給我任何獎學金。在加州大學洛杉磯分校攻讀博士學位是我的夢想，所以我決定擲骰子。在家人、朋友和港大校友的鼎力支持下，我剛籌得足夠的資金，在加州大學洛杉磯分校求學一年。
由於財政困難，我很緊張，並感到巨大壓力。但是，不必要的壓力對良好的研究不利，特別是對於培養原創想法。阿爾欽和哈羅德*德姆塞茨知道並很清楚這個問題。為了減輕我的財務壓力，二人"收養"了我。
Armen告訴我做兩件事：第一"放鬆"和第二"你太瘦，多吃點"。然後，哈羅德跟進，財政上支持我：僱用我為他的研究助理和教我如何做研究。即使在我獲得了部門資助之後，哈羅德仍然繼續財政上支持我，直到我畢業的那天。
哈羅德也把我帶到他的翅膀下，擔任我的論文主席。他堅持高標準的研究和喜愛討論原創的想法。儘管如此，他對寫作的要求很高。我回憶起一件事， 在我的最後一年，我需要在IO研討會上提出我的論文。知道哈羅德要求有高標準的寫作和我是一個非英語母語的作家，我花了無數的時間寫作（和修改）我的論文，希望能打動他。我也懇求兩個英語母語和從哈佛畢業同學的幫助，以編輯我的論文。然而，在研討會上，我完成了我論文介紹以後，Harold在大家前面開始批評我的寫作。我真的很尷尬，沮喪，想找個地方躲起來。
幾天后，哈羅德召喚我到他的辦公室，給了我一篇充滿了鉛筆標記的論文。阿爾欽後來做了同樣的事情。我多次閱讀（和重新閱讀）他們在我論文上寫下來的鉛筆標記，並意識到他們是優秀的更正。從那時起，我每天早上醒來，想想二人，我的寫作是否足夠清晰，以滿足他們的標準。回想起來，我很感激哈羅德的這一事件和他的慈父般的誠實，使我成為一個更好的作家和學者。
即使在我畢業之後，哈羅德總是站在我的肩膀上，並給我在研究和生活中有用建議，直到2017中旬。哈羅德是一個熱情，有趣，非常友好的人。他試圖幫助我和其他研究生在各種可能的方式，像父親對待他的孩子一樣。我很高興哈羅德過著充實而有意義的生活。但是，我真的很難過，他這麼早離開我們。我們非常想念他。
