Law, Economics & Cycling

Arsenal 3 - Aston Villa 2

2012-01-29T18:04:00.000-05:00

January has been a dismal month for the Arsenal, having won not a single game in the Premier League. Fortunately, today they narrowly avoided going winless for the entire month by beating Aston Villa in a thrilling FA Cup tie. The Villans led 2-0 at the half, on goals by Richard Dunne and Darren Bent, despite the fact that the Gunners were not playing at all badly. In the second half, the worm turned quickly. Just as in the first half, Arsenal turned up the heat early in the first half, and this time, Aston Villa succombed to the pressure, giving up two penalties (on fouls by the two first-half goal-scorers) - both dispatched by van Persie - with a rare Walcott goal sandwiched in between. Walcott, who played better today, shouldn't be given too much credit for the goal, although it was his fine run into the box that forced the action. He was just lucky to have an attempted defense clearance ricochet off him into the net, while he was looking the other way.

For once, I thought no one played badly for the Gunners today. It was a solid team effort. In the first half, the Gunner's goalie, Lukasz Fabianski, subbing for his countryman Wojciech Szczesny, made a meal of a few outlet passes, but fortunately he didn't have to pay a price, and he quickly learned to get rid of the ball with greater dispatch. In the second half, I thought Mertesacker played his best half of football so far as a Gunner. Not only did he dominate the air in his own box, but he nearly scored on a solid header at the other end of the pitch. Villa were fortunate to have a player stationed at the far post to keep it out of the net. Oxlade-Chamberlain was terrific again throughout the match, and no one was upset when, in the final minutes, he was substituted by Theirry Henry. It was particularly good to see Arsenal's two other substitutes get a run in the game. Mikel Arteta and Bacary Sagna are both coming off of injuries, and their return to the side can only improve the squad.

My New Ride

2012-01-29T15:39:00.002-05:00

Thanks to master mechanic Scott Rodriguez of T3 Multisport in Indy for building up my new bike, which I picked up today. Good news for folks in B-town, Scott will be moving down here sometime in the next several months. The best mechanic in Indy (IMHO) will become the best mechanic in Bloomington (also IMHO).

Here's my new Bianchi Oltre, complete with Record Group, HED Ardennes SL wheetset, Hutchinson tubeless tires, 3T bars and stem, Speedplay pedals, Bianchi Dr. Dobermann bottle cages, and a Specialized Toupe saddle to top it off (so to speak). I haven't had a chance to weigh it yet, but I guess it'll be under 16 pounds, which is plenty light for a big guy like me. (I didn't go for the lightest saddle, cassette, or tires).

UPDATE: Bike weighs in at 15.5 lbs

Yeah, IU is Ranked 216th!

2012-01-28T12:34:00.001-05:00

Don't you just love university rankings? The 2011/12 QS World University Rankings are out (I refuse on principle to link to rankings, so you'll have to find them for yourselves). Cambridge tops the list. Indiana comes in at 216, just between the University of Reading (UK) and the University of Indonesia.

What complete and utter BS. Like all other educational ranking systems, you will probably find general agreement on the top quintile and, perhaps, the bottom quintile (although where to rank individual schools within those quintiles is another matter). But any effort to rank the vast majority of institutions of higher learning in between is utter nonsense and should be given no weight by prospective students. And, yes, I'd say the same if IU were ranked in the top quintile, which it is not and probably should not be, except in specific subject areas (but the QS rankings only deal with the university as a whole).

Gino Bartali Was a Hero, and Not Just as a Cyclist

2012-01-28T10:17:00.001-05:00

Gino Bartali was one of the greatest grand tour riders in history, winning both the Giro d'Italia and the Tour de France on mutliple occasions, both before and after World War II. There's no saying how many grand tours he might have won, had the War not interrupted the prime of his career. Today, Cyclingnews has a great story (here) about Bartali's brave efforts to save Italian Jews during World War II. He smuggled photos and documents in his bike frame and saddle to a convent that produced counterfeit IDs, while soldiers guarding the roads assumed he was on training rides.

Starving the Beast; Killing the Economic Recovery

2012-01-27T15:38:00.001-05:00

The UK's Conservative/Liberal Coalition took office with an assumed mandate to solve the country's long-term debt problems by slashing budgets. The "City" pushed for it; but many economists, including for example Lord Skidelsky (see, e.g., here), warned on traditional Keynesian grounds that it was a dangerous thing to do in a recession.

How's it working out? Well, in the last quarter of 2011 the UK economy shrank by 0.2% (see, e.g., here), precipitating concerns of a possible double-dip recession. Indeed, Brad DeLong observes that the UK's economy is actually doing less well now than it did during the Great Depression (see here), and provides the following graph as evidence:

Does this prove the Keynesians right about the relatively importance of short-term stimulus over austerity? Of course not. But it does raise some tough questions for the deficit hawks, and not only in the UK, who have argued that budget cutting, by itself, would improve investor confidence enough to boost the economic recovery.

Indiana State Politics in Microcosm

2012-01-26T13:07:00.000-05:00

Two events in the Statehouse today pretty much sum up the sorry state of Indiana politics: a mass-transit bill was killed in committee, while a bill requiring public schools to teach religion (artfully rebranded as "creation science") was approved for consideration by the full Senate.

Limits of Heuristics?

2012-01-24T11:42:00.000-05:00

In his elegant book, Thinking Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux 2011), Daniel Kahneman reports on many fascinating findings of cognitive science over the last half century, including the following: when confronted with difficult questions, which would normally require a "System 2," deliberative approach requiring relatively greater attention and energy, individuals often resort instead to answering substitute, "heuristic" questions that allow System 1, the fast, intuitive decision process, to come up with quick and dirty solutions. Here is one of his examples: when faced with the "target" question, "How popular will the president be six months from now?" individuals will substitute the "heuristic" question, "How popular is the president now?" Because System 1 is, in fact, answering a different question, there is a heightened risk that the answer will not be correct for the more difficult target question. Nevertheless, in many cases the "heuristic alternative to careful reasoning ... works fairly well" (p. 98). While System 1's heuristic answers are subject to review and rejection by System 2, "a lazy System 2 often follows the path of least effort and endorses a heuristic answer without much scrutiny of whether it is truly appropriate."

I do not doubt that Kahneman's description of this process is correct (I certainly have no basis for raising any such doubts). What I wonder, however, is whether individuals typically differentiate between low-stakes and high-stakes questions/decisions, calling on System 2 when the stakes or risks stemming from an erroneous answer are relatively high. Kahneman doesn't raise this question (at least not at this point in the book). I suspect we do call on System 2 more as the costs of erroneous answers rise. If so, then we require some basis for explaining how individuals differentiate high-stakes from low-stakes circumstances, which the brain must be able to do very, very quickly.

I have not read past Chapter 9 in the book yet, and perhaps Kahneman takes up my question in later pages (although I didn't find it on a quick leaf through the balance of the book). However, given his findings about the generally poor ability of individuals to calculate risk, one wonders how individuals could accurately decide when the stakes are high enough to call on System 2.

I don't know the cognitive psychology literature at all well - certainly not well enough to know whether anyone's tested experimentally whether raising the costs of incorrect answers, or rewards for correct answers, to "target questions" reduces reliance on System 1's intuitive responses to substitute, heuristic questions. I would be surprised if no one has done this. I would be even more surprised to learn that material incentives play no role at all in the way individuals make decisions.

"I'm Sorry, Officer, But I Didn't See the Cyclist"

2012-01-22T16:48:00.001-05:00

Bob Mionske has an excellent column at Bicycling.com (here) about why that statement is not an excuse, avoiding liability, but an admission of guilt, and should be treated as such (unless the cyclist is not reasonably visible or is otherwise negligent).

This One's on the Manager: Arsenal 1 - Manchester United 2

2012-01-22T14:49:00.001-05:00

The outcome of this game was determined by one man: Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger. With zero fullbacks available to him because of injuries, Wenger, who has reneged on an earlier promise to sign at least one fullback during the January transfer window, was forced to play four center backs. In past games, Vermaelen and Koscielny have each deputized pretty well in that unfamiliar position. Today, inexplicably, Wenger chose to play the ever dubious Djourou in that position, and in the first half he was torched time and time again before Giggs beat him one last time to create the goal that put Man U up 1-0 at halftime.

Wenger had clearly seen enough of Djourou in the first half, and replaced him at the beginning of the second with young Gunner Nicholas Yennaris, who held his own resaonably well. That was Wenger's good substitution. Later in the second half, he made a horrible, game-changing substitution, bringing on Andrei Arshavin to replace Arsenal's best player to that point in the game, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain. If anyone should have been substituted, it was the ever-woeful Walcott, who barely played one decent ball the entire match. Oxlade-Chamberlain came off just after he created Arsenal's equalizing goal, which van Persie (who else?) scored. On came Andrei Arshavin, who's first contribution to the game was a textbook example of matador defense (in an area that should have been occupied by a left fullback), allowing Antonio Valencia, scorer of Man U's first goal, into the box where he set up Danny Wellbeck for an easy finish. And that, as they say, was that.

After the match, Arsene Wenger attempt to justify his decision to substitute Oxlade-Chamberlain, saying that he noticed the player had begun to fatigue (see here), something no one else watching the match would have noticed. Even van Persie was visibly angry when the substitution was made. One has to wonder at what point RvP says, "That's enough, I'm off to Barca or Real."

Arsenal are back to being a team in crisis, as they were at the beginning of the season. Qualification for the Champion's League is looking increasingly like a long-shot. At some point, it's not good enough for Arsene Wenger to make excuses about injuries and complain about high prices of players in the transfer market; he needs to take some responsibility for fielding a squad that just is not good enough. Walcott is not getting any better; Arshavin probably couldn't get a run out with Swansea; Djourou has never developed into a top-flight player; Rosicky is past his sell-by date. When your team is ravaged by injuries, and your only January signing is a 34-year-old Theirry Henry, questions will be raised about whether you still have what it takes to be a top-flight manager. It is now time for Wenger to step up, take control, and prove to Arsenal supporters and detractors alike, that he does still have it.

Amazingly, having lost three games in a row, the Gunners remain in 5th place, tied with Newcastle, one point ahead of Liverpool, and 5 points behind Chelsea. It is still not out of the question for Arsenal to finish fourth or even third. But they need their manager to make better footballing (not economic) decisions, and need some of their under-performing senior players to step up. I'm almost beyond hoping that Walcott has it in him. It will certainly help if they can back a couple of legit fullbacks from injury, not to mention Arteta and Wilshire in midfield.

Books I'm Reading Now

2012-01-22T11:02:00.000-05:00

I just finished reading, on my daughter's advice, Rainer Maria Rilke's Letters to a Young Poet (Vintage 1984). Rilke is among my favorite poets and novelists (his prose output was slight but wonderful). I thought I had read everything (significant) he had written; I even read Wolfgang Leppman's very good biography of him. But, somehow, this magical, slender collection of letters had escaped my attention. It confirms just what a thoughtful, kind, and wise person was Rilke, as well as a great, great writer.

I am about halfway through Stuart Banner's latest contribution to the legal history literature, American Property (Harvard 2011). Property scholars, in various disciplines, will learn (sometimes to their own surprise) how much they previously did not know about areas in which they are supposed experts. Others will find it a rich and eminently readable historical introduction to a topic that is fundamental to American law and society. My favorite chapter (so far) concerns the rise of the condominium in the 1960s, which raises the question of why such a useful and valuable form of ownership took so long to emerge in the US. Banner's characteristically interesting answer focuses on institutional prerequisites that needed to be put in place in order to support the market - a thoroughly "new institutional' explanation. This is must reading for all legal scholars, economists, and other social scientists working on property issues.

I'm just a few chapters into Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus & Grioux 2011), which develops a coherent story around many of the findings of cognitive psychology experiments over the past few decades, describing two radically different approaches to individual decision making: (1) System 1, which is fast, intuitive, and signficantly error-prone; and (2) System 2, which is slower, more costly, time-consuming, and less prone to error. The experiments and other evidence suggest that System 1 dominates and works very well for many, many more or less automatic kinds of decisions, and System 2 intervenes only when necessary to prevent significant errors when the stakes are high. Fascinating ideas presented in clear and convincing fashion by one of (if not the) most important cognitive psychologists of our time (Kahnemann won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2002 for his contributions to behavior economics). As someone who wants to hold on tightly to some minimal conception of rational behavior, I find some of the experimental findings Kahneman reports to be cognitively dissonant, but one of the hallmarks of rationality is the ability to absorb, digest, and make sense of information that does not necessarily agree with one's prior assumptions and conclusions.

After a long delay, based in part on sheer intimidation about the sheer weight of the volumes and the intellectual challenge of understanding the contents, I have finally cracked open Volume I of Derek Parfit's On What Matters (Oxford 2011). This will not be a book I read quickly and easily. I am, however, highly sympathetic to Parfit's grand scheme to combine into a single theoretical framework Kant's moral theory (e.g., the categorical imperative) with welfare-consequentialism. While I retain substantial doubts about the likelihood (or even the value) of discovering a unified, all-encompassing theory of ethics (for reasons identified by Amartya Sen in his recent book, The Idea of Justice (Harvard 2009)), I'm open to being convinced otherwise by Parfit's arguments.

Obama Wins Big in South Carolina

2012-01-22T02:38:00.002-05:00

That is not a typo.

An Enclosure Movement for the 21st Century

2012-01-21T17:47:00.001-05:00

"Enclosure" is a term that refers to the parcelization and privatization of "the commons," i.e., lands previously open to all "commoners" to graze livestock, hunt wildlife (within legal limits), and gather peat, wood, and other resources. The commons were enclosed in order to create incentives for greater economic production (as many economist historians including Douglass North and Deirdre McCloskey have pointed out), but also to consolidate political power in a small group of large landowners, who were well represented in the various parliaments that passed "inclosure acts." As the great Marx-ish social historian, E.P. Thompson wrote in Whigs and Hunters (1975), p. 261, n. 3,

What was often at issue was not property, supported by law, against noproperty;it was alternative definitions of property-rights: for the landowner,enclosure; for the cottager, common rights; for the forest officialdom,'preserved grounds' for the deer; for the foresters, the fight to take turfs. For as long as it remained possible, the ruled - if they could find a purse and a lawyer - would actually fight for their rights by means of law; occasionally the copyholders, resting upon the precedents of sixteenth-century law, could actually win a case. When it ceased to be possible to continue the fight at law,men still felt a sense of legal wrong: the propertied had obtained their power by illegitimate means.

As I wrote many years ago in an article about Thompson's conception of the rule of law, which he articulated as an afterward to Whigs and Hunters, "[t]he enclosure laws took away property rights - specifically, common-use rights - from those who traditionally had foraged and grazed their animals on the commons, and gave those rights to other, politically powerful individuals who already possessed a great deal of property." Daniel H. Cole, "'An Unqualified Public Good:' : E.P. Thompson and the Rule of Law," 28(2) Journal of Law & Society 177, 180 (2001).

This past week, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld legislation with precisely the same effect in Golan et al. v. Holder, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 907 (2012) (full opinion available here). In a 6-2 decision (Justice Kagan did not participate in the ruling because she had worked on the case as Soliciter General before she joined the Court), the Court upheld section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, 17 U.S.C. sec. 104A, 109(a), which sought to improve US compliance with the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (in effect since 1886) by expanding US copyright protection to works that have long been in the "public domain" under US law. Traditionally, the US only recognized intellectual property of foreign writers and artists if their works were published in this country or their home countries granted reciprocal rights to US writers and artists.

The Court's ruling is just the latest example of its unwillingness to set limits on the intellectual property rights under the Copyright Clause (see Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 US 186 (2003)), and is already being criticized by constitutional and intellectual property scholars (including my IU colleague Gerard Magliocca, from the Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, here). Effectively, the Court held that Congress can take remove works from the public domain, giving their creators monopoly property rights, thereby raising the cost of use by others, including the symphony orchestras and individual musicians who were among the petitioners arguing that the law was unconstitutional. The named petitioner in the case, Lawrence Golan, is a Professor of Music and conductor of the symphony orchestra at the University of Denver. His long and ultimately unsuccessful battle against the Uruguay Round Agreements Act is chronicled here, in an article that also clearly explains what was at stake for musicians, scholars, and students in the US.

It is difficult to see how such a Uruguay Round Agreement Act furthers the purposes of the US Constitution's Copyright Clause (Art. I, sec. 8) which gives Congress the authority: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." The progress of science and useful Arts cannot possibly be promoted by the post hoc granting copyrights to writers and artists whose works have long been in public domain and who are long dead. It seems unlikely that Stravinsky, Virginia Woolfe, or Picasso will be taking advantage of the new incentives Congress has created for them. But their estates and descendants will profit at the expense of artists, musicians, and students in the US. Meanwhile, the Act does nothing to increase protections for current or future generations of artists, composers, and writers. The effects are purely redistributional, and in ways that do not obviously improve social welfare.

What Will We Learn from the South Carolina Primary?

2012-01-21T11:20:00.000-05:00

South Carolina is a social conservative bastion. Whether or not he actually wins the primary, the fact that Romney will not be soundly defeated in South Carolina constitutes a moral victory for him, and indicates that he has the Republican nomination all but sewn up. If he actually wins, the nomination will be a done deal, even if Gingrich and Santorum keep campaigning. Whoever "wins" South Carolina, it is nearly impossible to imagine either Gingrich or Santorum going on to claim the nomination over Romney.

The more interesting feature of the South Carolina primary is to see how many votes non-candidate Herman Cain garners on behalf of Stephen Colbert. Colbert, who announced his candidacy last week, could not get on the ballot, but Cain's name remains on the ballot, despite the fact that he dropped out of the contest weeks ago. Yesterday, ex-candidate Cain and Colbert appeared together at a rally at the College of Charleston.

Colbert's faux campaign is designed, in non-coordination with the "Definitely Not Coordinating with Stephen Colbert Super PAC," to illustrate the detrimental consequences of the Supreme Court's 2010 ruling in Citizens United, which declared corporations to be people for purposes of first amendment rights, including the right to fund political advertisements. As a practical matter, I don't know that the Court's ruling has changed campaign finance as much as its critics have argued. I do, however, greatly appreciate the way Colbert and Jon Stewart are shining a very bright light on the general problem of financing political campaigns.

Krugman on Academic Exchange in the Internet Age

2012-01-21T10:42:00.000-05:00

Paul Krugman had an excellent blog post (here) the other day exploring the nature of academic exchange in the internet age, which is both pithy and interesting. In it, he describes the deplorable delays and increasing irrelevance of publishing in academic journals. Already 30 years ago, Krugman points out, economists and other social scientists relied mainly on working papers from reputable outlets (such as the National Bureau of Economic Research), with "journals serving as tombstones" for the finished products. And that was before the Social Science Research Network almost completely democratized the dissemination of academic working papers.

Academic journals are still with us, but, as Krugman argues, they no longer serve the traditional purpose of disseminating scholarly ideas. I even subscribe to a few (mostly economics) journals, but it is an increasingly rare event to come across a published article in my areas of research which I have not already read (or skimmed) in some working-paper version.

So what purpose(s) do (costly) journals serve? I can think of two. First, journals persist as (fallible) proxies by which academic departments assess an individual scholar's reputation and worthiness for promotion and tenure. Second, because working papers can and do change as authors respond to comments and criticisms, citation becomes a confusing and potentially misleading business. Journals, as "tombstones," identify the final remains and resting place of articles, providing reliable focal points for citations.

Are these two purposes enough to ensure the continued persistence of academic journals? Well, probably not in expensive paper form. Based on anecdotal evidence, electronic publication definitely seem on the upswing, and we might predict that, based on cost considerations alone, all journals ultimately will be published only in electronic form; print versions are likely to disappear entirely (saving lots of trees in the process). I am aware that similar arguments have been made about books, but it seems to me the extinction of printed academic journals is more likely than the extinction of either scholarly or non-scholarly books. For one thing, a lot of people (myself included) like to hold books in our hands. I don't know anyone who feels so strongly about the feel (and smell) of journals. I could well be overestimating the relative value of physical books, compared to physical journals; but I'm pretty sure, at least, that I'm not understating the value of printed journals.

The remaining question is whether democratization of the scholarly mission, represented by on-line publishing, including self-publishing, is a good or bad thing on balance. As a non-elite academic myself (who has a relatively tough time getting his work into the top peer-reviewed journals as well as top-20 student-edited law reviews), I tend to favor easier dissemination of a wider range of scholarly research. But within limits. As the pool of academic research widens and deepens, it requires more and more time and effort for readers to separate the wheat from the chaff (assessed by their own lights). Many (if not all) of us will continue to desire proxies, including gatekeepers, to minimize our search costs for quality scholarship in our areas of research.

Mialon on "Rational Lovemaking"

2012-01-20T13:15:00.000-05:00

A forthcoming issue of Economic Inquiry (Vol. 1, 2012) includes an article by Emory University economist Hugo Mialon on "The Economics of Faking Ecstacy," which offers a "signaling model of rational lovemaking." Here's the abstract:

In this paper, we develop a signaling model of rational lovemaking. In the act of lovemaking, a man and a woman send each other possibly deceptive signals about their true state of ecstasy. For example, if one of the partners is not in ecstasy, then he or she may decide to fake it. The model predicts that (1) a higher cost of faking lowers the probability of faking; (2) middle-aged and old men are more likely to fake than young men; (3) young and old women are more likely to fake than middle-aged women; and (4) love, formally defined as a mixture of altruism and demand for togetherness, increases the likelihood of faking. The predictions are tested with data from the 2000 Orgasm Survey. Besides supporting the model's predictions, the data also reveal an interesting positive relationship between education and the tendency to fake in both men and women.

Who even knew there was a 2000 Orgasm Survey? Is there anything economists cannot explain?

Back to the Economic Future

2012-01-18T09:18:00.001-05:00

Adam Posen, External Member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England, recently gave a speech to the Royal Institute for International Affairs, which has just been published at the Bank of England website (here). In it, he mounts an interesting argument about the relevance of the late nineteenth century for understanding the global political-economic picture both currently and for the next 10-20 years. Interesting stuff.

Andrew Sullivan Mounts a Heroic Defense of the Obama Record

2012-01-17T08:28:00.002-05:00

Here, at the Daily Beast/Newsweek. In contrast to Sullivan, I don't believe that Obama's reelection is "essential to this country's future," even if it is preferable to the election of any of the Republican candidates.

MLK Day Ride

2012-01-16T19:42:00.003-05:00

I rode a 34-mile loop today, featuring four hard climbs, and an "easy" southward leg on Bottom Rd, the only flat road in Bloomington. Unfortunately, the wind was gusting from the south up to 30 mph.

I got dropped, which is not unusual. What troubles me is that it was a solo ride. I'm the anti-Jens. He drops his shadow; I get dropped by mine.

And Then There Were None

2012-01-16T18:25:00.000-05:00

With Jon Huntsman's departure from the Republican presidential campaign, the number of candidates who believe (or admit to believing) what science is telling us = 0. It appears certain that a vote for a Republican candidate in next fall's presidential election, whatever else it might represent, will amount to a vote for willful scientific ignorance.

On-line Course in the Basics of Climate Science

2012-01-16T09:01:00.000-05:00

Offered by the University of Chicago. Looks so interesting, I might have to sign up for it myself (in the summer). For more information see here.

Alan Krueger on "The Rise and Consequences of Inequality in the United States"

2012-01-16T08:53:00.000-05:00

Alan Krueger, the Bendheim Professor of Economics and Public Policy at Princeton, who currently serves as Chair of the President's Council of Economic Advisors, has offered the clearest and most compelling explication of the problem of rising income inequality in the US that I have yet to see. Read it all, including the figures here.

No Joy in Swansea: Swans 3 - Gunners 2

2012-01-15T12:58:00.000-05:00

It's always tough traveling to Wales for a match, but the Gunners were not only outworked by Swansea, but outplayed for most of the match. It was the Swans who looked like a contender for a Champion's League spot, while the Gunners looked like a team just hoping to avoid the drop. The result was not a fluke. Arsenal got what they deserved: another result in the loss column.

The Gunners clearly missed Mikel Arteta. In his absence, Jack Ramsey struggled to coordinate the offense from midfield. His passing was unusually wasteful. Meanwhile, there were the usual poor performances from the usual suspects (Walcott's one moment of brilliance for Arsenal's second goal cannot excuse his lack of quality through most of the match; Arshavin, by contrast, didn't even have one moment of brilliance).

Thierry Henry came on for the last quarter of the match, but didn't have the same magical impact he had in the midweek FA Cup tie against Leeds. In fact, he had no impact at all.

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger was quoted in the press this week to the effect that he did not expect to make any further changes in the squad during the January transfer period. Apparently, he is sufficiently happy with a make-shift defense that allowed three goals today against Swansea. Nor will he sell Andrei Arshavin, though perhaps because he could get nothing for him.

Arsenal are not yet out of contention for the fourth and final Champion's League spot next year, but they are pretty rapidly playing themselves out of contention. Recent poor results at Fulham and Swansea are disturbingly reminiscent of the Arsenal team that started the season at the bottom of the League Table.

Iron (Creepy) Lady

2012-01-14T23:00:00.003-05:00

I'm not much of a movie goer, so I can't pretend to be a movie critic. But I went to see The Iron Lady this evening, and was struck by a few things: (1) the theater, in my highly-educated and politically-aware college town, was very sparsely populated for the opening weekend of a much touted new film concerning a major political figure, featuring a great cast (any Liberal distaste for the Conservative Thatcher should have been at least somewhat offset by the fact that she was being portrayed by the Liberal Streep); (2), perhaps partly explaining (1), the entire film was really, really creepy; (3) Meryl Streep, as virtually everyone has noted, was astonishing in the lead role; and (4) several of the scenes were unnecessarily, almost painfully, loud, which seems to be a trend in films (or perhaps I'm just increasingly sensitive to high volumes as I grow older).

Iron Lady is a very affecting, even disturbing, film. But I'm not sure I could recommend it, except as a lesson on how truly great actors are able to completely inhabit characters.

Expediency at Expedia

2012-01-13T17:45:00.000-05:00

I was checking out some airfares for a forthcoming trip at Expedia.com. Every time I selected a flight, the listed price changed. The "new" price invariably was higher, by as much as 50%. What's up with that?

The Relativity of Economic Values

2012-01-13T13:16:00.003-05:00

I'm currently reading Slavomir Rawicz's The Long Walk (Lyon's Press [1956] 2010), a supposedly* true tale of a young Polish calvaryman's escape from a Siberian gulag. I was struck by a scene in which prisoners and their guards, stranded by a blizzard in a Siberian forest on their way to the prison camp, are rescued by members of a local indigenous people, Ostyaks, with sleds pulled by teams of reindeer. Of their rescuers, Rawicz writes:

They coveted from the Army only the empty tins which, by order, were always carefully preserved. Their interest in metalware revealed their primitive background. Metal was scarce but skins and timber were plentiful. So there was a good deal of surreptitious bartering between them and the Army cooks of skins for tins. A sable for an empty meat tin was a bargain for both sides and a lesson for the rest of us in relative values. The tins, they told us, were for use as cooking utensils and would be highly prized by the women when they returned home.

----------------------------------
*Serious doubts persist about (a) whether the story is true and (b), if true, whether it is Rawicz's own story. Fiction or non-fiction, it is an absorbing read. I might add that my wife's grandfather, who was sent to Siberia (from Wilno, now Vilnius) because he refused to be conscripted into Soviet Russia's "Polish Army," did walk out of Siberia back to his home, where, at first, his wife was completely unable to recognize him.

Pro Athletes Are Just Different from the Rest of Us

2012-01-12T21:38:00.000-05:00

From (40-year-old) Jens Voigt (here):

I could ride from Los Angeles to Denver anytime you ask me and keep a 35kph average. But professional races get decided when we’re riding 50 or 55kph. The ability to produce that kind of power over a shorter time is crucial to make the front group or to get in a breakaway, and that’s what I must have—and what hurts the most to get.

How many of us, regardless of age, could ride from LA to Denver "anytime you ask" at an average of nearly 22 mph?

Do Ordinary Folks Understand How Markets Work?

2012-01-12T15:04:00.000-05:00

A prominent jurist once said to a small group (including myself) gathered around a conference table, "Most people don't understand how markets work." I thought about this claim for a moment and responded with a simple question: "Do you really think people don't understand the meaning and implications of a 'Sale' sign in a shop window?"

Indiana University is Ninth Leading Industrial Emitter of CO2 in State

2012-01-11T14:13:00.003-05:00

According to a new, interactive map published by EPA (here), my employer IU ranks ninth among the 21 major emitting facilities in the state of Indiana, pumping out nearly 185,000 MTCO2eq in 2010. Perhaps I should see how we rank compared to other major state universities and compare that ranking with the US News rankings.

Adam Smith's Humanistic Economics

2012-01-10T10:45:00.003-05:00

An excellent post at the Philosopher's Beard (here).

Defending Mitt: An Unpleasant Task

2012-01-10T09:05:00.002-05:00

Over the past few years, Mitt Romney has tried to monopolize issues, ranging from health care and social security reform to the war in Iraq, by surrounding them. It's not just a matter of flip-flopping or changing his mind about an issue; Romney appears to want to hold onto internally contradictory positions in ways that would, if anyone thought he was sincere about it, challenge the rational actor model. It's as if he believes hypocrisy and self-contradiction are the values most prized by voters in a presidential election. Assuming Romney wins the Republican nomination, the Obama presidential campaign surely will run TV commercials featuring Romney contradicting himself, and Romney's response will be? He can't deny he said what he said. Perhaps he'll insist that x = -x is not a contradiction at all, but a sensible, conservative approach to policy-making.

Having said all that, Romney does not deserve all the flak he is taking for admitting that he likes to be able to fire people who do not do a good job. Yes, I know, he said it in such a way as to create the opportunity for a wicked-sounding sound-bite. And the previously principled Jon Huntsman, among others, have been exploiting that opportunity mercilessly. But the fact of the matter is that we all like to be able to fire people who do a lousy job for us. We like to fire cable TV companies and cell phone companies that overcharge and provide poor service; we like to fire handy men who cause more problems than they fix; and we especially like to fire politicians who we consider venal, corrupt, stupid, immoral or otherwise lacking in character or ability.

Perhaps it was unwise politically for Romney to talk about firing anyone given the relatively high unemployment rate, but shame on the other hypocrits who, by criticizing Romney's statement, imply that everyone, not matter how incompetent, deserves a job, including as President of the United States.

The Prodigal Son Returns

2012-01-09T17:32:00.000-05:00

Thierry Henry looks familiar enough in an Arsenal jersey, but the number 12 on his back will take a bit of getting used to. When he came on as a second-half substitute, the Emirates crowd went wild. Imagine their reaction, just ten minutes later, when he scored the game's only goal. Song played him through with a fine pass, which Henry controlled brilliantly with his first touch, while opening his body up to slot the ball home across the goalkeeper into the far side of the net with his second touch. Brilliant. Arsenal went on to beat Leeds in the third round of the FA Cup 1-0.

If only Henry could teach Theo Walcott (and Gervinho, if he weren't away on national duty) how to be clinical in front of goal.

2012 Off to a Good Cycling Start

2012-01-08T17:55:00.000-05:00

108 miles in the first eight days of the new year, including 4 outdoor and 3 indoor rides. Puts me in a good frame of mind for the start of the new semester tomorrow.

I enjoyed the flats of Bottom Rd today. It's just too bad I had to climb hills to get there and back out again.

2 Days, 5 Hills

2012-01-06T18:01:00.000-05:00

Between cold temps, icy roads, and short hours of daylight, outdoor rides in early January are rare enough in Central and South-central Indiana; outdoor rides on consecutive days in early January are rarer still - as rare as the warm spell we've had the last couple of days. Who cares that the wind was gusting up to 20 mph both days? With temps in the low-50s yesterday and 60 today, and plenty of sunshine both days, I was surprised not to see more cyclists on the road (notwithstanding the fact that thousands of students are still out of town). How nice to have this weather this week, when I could take advantage of it, rather than next week, when I'll be stuck in classes, committee meetings, etc. (BTW, for those of you who might be skeptical of the "academic lifestyle," this doesn't mean I'm not working this week, or working less hard, only that I have more flexible work hours during the winter "break.")

Yesterday was a one-hour ride featuring climbs up Old Meyers, Earl Young, and Firehouse hills (in that order), and training stress score (TSS) of 92. Today, the ride was twenty minutes and 7 miles longer, with climbs up Earl Young and Old Meyers (in that order), and a TSS of 124. Total climbing for the two days: almost exactly 3000 feet. Not too bad for a large (putting it nicely) old guy (who is trying to become somewhat less large).

Did Wittgenstein Read Diderot?

2012-01-06T13:29:00.001-05:00

Wittgenstein: "Whereof one cannot speak, one must remain silent" (Tractatus, 1922).

Diderot: "True philosophy would find itself considerably briefer if all philosophers would be willing, like me, to abstain from speaking of what is manifestly incomprehensible" (Encyclopedia, "To Act").

I am far from an expert on matters of philosophy, especially across different historical eras. But, as noted in a previous posting (here), the Wittgenstein quote has always appeared to me to be nothing more than a confounding tautology. The Diderot quote, by contrast, strikes me as sensible (and in his historical context, of course, religiously subversive). Perhaps Wittgenstein meant to say something similar to what Diderot asserted (more clearly)?

By the way, I found the Diderot quote in Arthur M. Wilson's excellent, eponymously entitled 1972 biography (p. 139).

Can Economists and Environmentalists Get Along?

2012-01-05T09:20:00.003-05:00

Over at Legal Planet (here), Dan Farber observes that economists have learned a lot over the past couple of decades about how to deal with environmental problems in their models, and argues that environmentalists need to embrace the positive utility of economics for their cause and appreciate that trade-offs are sometimes necessary. In support of this argument, Dan enlists a neat graphic (reproduced below) from a Gallup Poll, showing an unmistakable shift in attitudes of Americans, who now favor economic development even if it requires a marginal reduction in environmental quality.

Without disagreeing in any way with Dan's larger point, I think this graph provides only weak evidence of a shift in public priorities, away from environmental protection and toward economic growth. First there is the question of whether the crossing of the lines after 2007 is a temporary phenomenon - an artifact of currently weak economic conditions - rather than a more robust change in preferences. Prior to the global economic depression of 2008, from which we are only slowly recovering, a significant majority (55% to 37%) thought that environmental protection should be prioritized over economic growth. That the lines crossed during a steep economic downturn is easy enough to understand, given that environmental protection, beyond minimal standards of air and water quality, is in the nature of a luxury good (as the "Environmental Kuznets Curve" suggests).

Moreover, even if the graph is emblematic of a longer-term change in attitudes, the survey questions on which it is based are premised on a common category mistake that conceptually severs environmental protection from economic growth as if they are not part of the same social welfare function. In other words, the reason environmentalists need to pay more attention to, and be more accepting of, economics is not so much because people prefer economic growth to environmental protection but because environmental protection is an essential component of "real economic growth," as defined by Sir John Hicks 65 years ago (see his 1946 book Value and Capital), and is most effectively advocated as such.

Worry Less about Methane and More about CO2

2012-01-04T14:05:00.000-05:00

According to this informative post at RealClimate.org.

Can We Now Go Back to Ignoring Iowa?

2012-01-04T11:16:00.001-05:00

Now that Rick Santorum has (reportedly) come within 8 votes of winning the Iowa Caucuses, can we finally stop paying attention to them as if they have any real national significance?

On a slightly more serious note, in contrast to CNN's claim that the Iowa results are a "big win" for Santorum, I view Mitt Romney as the big winner. For months, one challenger after another has taken leads over Romney in Iowa polls, only to fall by the wayside. It is, in a sense, an upset that Romney prevailed at all, by however slim a margin. He beat the toughest competitor in the field: the anyone-but-Mitt candidate.

The implication from the Iowa result is that for all of the (well-founded) suspicions of Romney's conservative credentials and his flip-flopping on issues, which will expose him to withering attacks in a general election campaign against President Obama, Romney remains the strongest Republican contender in an admittedly weak field. Even in a state like Iowa, with lots of "values voters" (a pernicious label that implies other voters are unprincipled), the practical desire to nominate an electable presidential candidate narrowly overrode other values. I actually find this reassuring, though I remain very troubled by the high level of support for Santorum, who is not only unelectable but ideologically rigid and intellectually several cards short of a full deck.

The (Poor) Quality of Officiating in the Premier League

2012-01-03T10:58:00.000-05:00

It's not easy being a referee. So many rules to remember; so much happening all over a very large playing field; players more or less constantly holding, handling, pushing, shoving, tackling, diving, and especially complaining; and just two assistants running the sidelines to help manage the match. Given the scale and importance of the job they have to do, it's no wonder referees make mistakes from time to time. But the rate and importance of referee error seem to be increasing. In fact, the overall level of officiating appears very poor. My evidence is only anecdotal, but I watch a lot of Premier League matches (five or six matches a week on average) and I witness appallingly bad decisions - decisions that actually or potentially affect outcomes - in nearly every match. The model of a single referee with assistants on either sideline is simply not good enough for the modern, very fast, game.

What is to be done? Well, perhaps the FA could follow the National Hockey League's example and put a second referee on the pitch, each with responsibility for half the field. In addition to improving the positioning of the refs, it would provide another set of eyes (on the field, rather than the side) to help with crucial decisions, including bad tackles, penalties, dives, etc.

Putting another ref on the field would not solve all the problems - there is no perfectly functioning rule-enforcement system either on the playing field or in the courts of law - but substantial marginal improvements are available and are urgently needed to protect the integrity of the game.

David Brooks Tells a Scary Halloween Story

2012-01-03T10:34:00.001-05:00

In his column in today's New York Times (here), David Brooks doesn't exactly celebrate the ignorance, insularity, and intolerance of the "largest block of the electorate," "the white working class ... with high school degrees and maybe some college." He merely takes it as a given, but in a way that strikes me as deplorably reductionist. And he portrays Rick Santorum as that block's hero or at least its representative among Republican presidential candidates. His argument seems to be that, if only the "elites" would get out of the way, someone like Santorum could win this election in a landslide. If Brooks is right about that - and, needless to say, I hope and believe he is not - we should all fret for the future of our republic.

Fulham 2 - Arsenal 1

2012-01-02T16:23:00.000-05:00

I didn't get to see the game, but the result is very disappointing, especially as Chelsea won at Wolves, putting them back into fourth place, one point ahead of the Gunners. Admittedly, three games in less than a week will challenge any side, but Arsenal only managed to take four points from the three games, which just isn't good enough. Neither is it good enough to score one goal per game. Robin van Persie plainly needs help up front, but Walcott and Gervinho (who will leave soon for the African Cup of Nations) seem unable to hit the net. Thierry Henry will provide some temporary assistance, but the rumored move for German-Polish striker Lucas Podolski would also be welcome.

Snyder on Pinker

2012-01-02T10:02:00.000-05:00

In Foreign Affairs (here), Timothy Snyder offers a sound and fair-minded critique of Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined (Viking 2011).

Hat tip: Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution.

Lord Sacks on the Necessity of Religion

2012-01-02T08:59:00.002-05:00

In the current issue of Standpoint magazine (here), England's Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks argues that, regardless of the truths taught by science, religion remains necessary to give meaning to the world and our lives in it. His argument appears to be borne out by the persistence of religious belief in a modern world dominated by science. Time and time again religious doctrines have been challenged by science, but no matter how much we learn about the universe and how it works, religious faith persists (in some places more than in others).

I have just a few points to make in response to Lord Sacks' arguments. First, his argument that belief in a god is necessary for utilitarian purposes - to give meaning to our lives in an otherwise meaningless universe - is at odds with virtually all religious belief systems which demand belief in god regardless of its utility. Second, he acknowledges that there are non-religious sources of meaning, and does not establish that a belief in god, or any particular god(s), is necessary to create that meaning. Third, he does not explain how positing a god (any god) establishes anything more than a (mythical) starting point for a system of ethics that, in any case, is created by humans themselves. If ethical/religious systems are created by humans for their own purposes - to give meaning to their lives and to order societies - then the existence of non-existence of a god hardly seems a necessary step. Fourth, he ignores (as Pascal did) the conflicts between inconsistent and mutually intolerant ethical systems established pursuant to beliefs in different gods, and all the trouble that has arisen throughout human history as a consequence.

Finally, and most interestingly from my perspective, the arguments Lord Sacks made seem fully consistent with arguments made more than 300 years ago by Benedict Spinoza, which led to his expulsion from the (relatively liberal) Jewish community of Amsterdam and his condemnation, even by liberal Christian theologians, as an "atheist" (which he was not) and even "Satan on earth." That Lord Sacks can make such theistic or deistic claims today and remain Chief Rabbi is an indication of just how far religion doctrine itself has been forced to conform to different ethical norms, including norms of tolerance of other belief systems, generated predominantly by secular forces.

In the end, Lord Sacks is quite right that scientific knowledge alone cannot give meaning to our lives and order society so that we might live together peaceably. It hardly follows, however, that some supernatural being (especially the impetuous, jealous, and mean-spirited one of the Old Testament) must therefore exist to cajole, entice, and threaten us into right behavior in human society.

The Colts Win the Andrew Luck Sweepstakes

2012-01-01T15:51:00.000-05:00

By losing at Jacksonville today (despite playing hard), the Colts have secured the first pick in the 2012 draft, which will undoubtedly be quarterback Andrew Luck of Stanford. Contrary to many pundits who believe that Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck cannot co-exist on the same team, I believe the situation is ideal for both. Manning is 37, and even if he comes back fully healthy next season, he can be expected to play only two or three more years at best. And he is the perfect guy to coach up Luck to play in the NFL. Meanwhile, even if Luck is anxious to become a starter, he has to recognize that the opportunity to learn from the best can only be great for what is a very promising and probably lengthy career. Especially given all the holes the Colts still have to plug on the offensive line, it will be in Luck's self-interest to watch from the sidelines next season (at least).

A Great Weekend for the Gunners

2012-01-01T12:44:00.000-05:00

Sunderland provided the perfect ending to a great weekend for Arsenal by beating Man City 1-0 on the penultimate kick of the match. The top four teams (Man City, Man U, Tottenham, and Chelsea) all lost, allowing the Gunners back into the top four and putting them within 3 points of 3d, and nine points of the co-leaders.

Meanwhile, Wenger has confirmed that former Arsenal talisman Theirry Henry will be rejoining the team on a two-month loan to add some offensive firepower. In addition, Wenger has indicated that the injury suffered by Thomas Vermaelen in yesterday's game (a calf strain) will require him to dip into the market for a defender. And news reports indicate that Arsenal will make an offer for German International striker Lucas Podolski, who together with Henry would help take some scoring pressure off of Robin van Persie's shoulders.

Happy New Year to Everyone

2012-01-01T10:02:00.000-05:00

However good (or not) your 2011, I hope your 2012 is better.

My chief resolution for 2011: not to move house again. (That should be an easy one to keep.)

Arsenal 1 - Queens Park Rangers 0

2011-12-31T17:45:00.001-05:00

Because of the group ride in Indy, I was able to watch only the first 15 minutes of the match live. I watched the remainder after the ride (thank goodness for Fox Soccer On-demand).

Just like the last game, Arsenal dominated possession and scoring opportunities in the first half, although Szczesny was forced to make one good save early. The Gunners once again failed to take advantage of a handful of decent (or better) scoring chances. A goalless draw at the half was disappointing for fans hoping for a better reaction to the Gunners' midweek disappointment.

Arsenal came out for the second half displaying a great sense of urgency and aggression. Arteta, in particular, appeared to take up a more forward role. In the 54th minute, Arsenal's most dependable defender, Thomas Vermaelen, had to leave the game with a heavy limp. A very disturbing sight to all Gunners fans, who can only hope the injury is minor and not a recurrence of the major injury that ruled Vermalen out all of last season. Shortly after Vermaelen's departure, Theo Walcott, who was poor throughout the match, was played in on goal by a great pass from Aaron Ramsey, only to pull his shot wide of the QPR goal. Finally, in the 59th minute, the breakthrough came when the right player, Robin van Persie, was played in on goal by a slide-rule pass from Andrei Arshavin. In contrast to Walcott, van Persie showed no self doubt at all, and simply played the ball past the QPR keeper with his lethal left foot. That goal gave RvP the Arsenal record for goals in a calendar year with 36, and put him within one of the Premier League record of 37 goals, set by the great Alan Shearer.

RvP's goal settled the nerves of Arsenal fans and players alike. Having the chase the game, QPR inevitably created counterattack possibilities for the Gunners. Arsenal had a few such chances, but could not score a second. More importantly, QPR were unable to score a first, which left the Gunners with all three (much needed) points. The win put the Gunners back into fourth place in the Premiership, two points ahead of Liverpool and Chelsea.

The winter transfer window opens tomorrow, and Arsene Wenger is expected to sign Arsenal hero Thierry Henry on a two-month loan from New York Red Bulls. Henry will provide some much needed goal-scoring support for Robin van Persie, especially with strikers Marouane Chamakh and Gervinho scheduled to miss a number of games in February while on duty for their countries in the Africa Cup of Nations. Arsenal also need a bit of defensive help, and that need may have increased today depending on the severity of Vermaelen's injury.

New Year's Eve Ride

2011-12-31T16:40:00.000-05:00

I drove up to Indy for a group ride - really two group rides. First, a small group, including Coach Bob and Dr. Wilkes, rode from Fishback Creek to Shamrock Springs Elementary School in Carmel, which was the departure point for the larger group ride known as "Smokey Row." Both groups were well led and a real pleasure to ride with, despite the overcast skies and chilly temperatures (about which one cannot complain too much - we're lucky to be riding at all on Dec. 31). It was a good ride with which to end the year, which has not be the best cycling year for me. Here's hoping for a better cycling year, for everyone, in 2012.

That's Why They Play the Game (Still I'm Gobsmacked)

2011-12-31T09:45:00.000-05:00

How did title contenders Man U lose at home to bottom dwellers Blackburn Rovers? Old Trafford is a virtually impregnable fortress, but it was overrun today by (relatively speaking) a light infantry, and on Sir Alex Ferguson's 70th birthday. How does that happen?

Two New Anti-Environmental Court Rulings

2011-12-30T23:28:00.000-05:00

Two federal courts published decisions today that obstruct environmental protection efforts. In my view, one of the cases is correctly decided, while the other is only a temporary injunction pending full judicial review on the merits.

The more momentous decision is the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of California's ruling in Rocky Mt. Farmers Union v. Goldstene, 211 US Dist. LEXIS 149593 (2011), which enjoined the California Air Resources Board (CARB) rule establishing a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) under that state's Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). Specifically, the court found the rule violates the federal Constitution's Dormant Commerce Clause, which prevents states from enacting laws or rules that substantially disadvantage producers from other states in its markets. In this case, the plaintiffs alleged that CARB's LCFS did just that by, in effect, raising the cost of low-carbon fuels produced in other states and sold in California relative to the cost of low-carbon fuels produced and sold within California, essentially by taxing transportation (as a component of the carbon intensity of production). I believe this decision is correct as a constitutional matter, even though as a matter of economic policy it makes sense to impose a higher price on fuels that are more carbon intensive because they have been shipped (using carbon-based technologies) a longer distance. Unfortunately, the Constitution does not necessarily support every economic policy, however sensible.

In the second case, EME Homer City Generation v. EPA, USCA Case #11-1302 (Dec. 30, 2011), the DC Circuit stayed implementation of EPA's new Cross-state Air Pollution Rule, pending full judicial review of the rule on the merits, which could take up to a year. The rule would impose stringent new requirements for reducing emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides on power plants (the largest sources of such emissions). Plaintiffs complain that the cost of the new rule will force plant closings, layoffs, and possible blackouts. However, other utilities support the rule. EPA's regulatory impact analysis for the new rule finds that it would reduce premature mortality by between 13,000 to 34,000 per year (starting in 2014), yielding between $120 billion and $280 billion in annual social benefits, compared to just $800 million in annual costs. I do not know why the court issued the stay pending final judicial review of the rule; in its order, the court merely states that the plaintiffs met the requirements for a stay without further elaboration. I find that lack of explanation troubling especially given the high social costs of delaying implementation (if EPA's numbers are anywhere close to correct). I wish I could confidently predict that the DC Circuit ultimately will uphold the rules on the merits, but I'm finding it more and more difficult to predict with any kind of confidence how courts will rule in complex environmental cases. In most such cases, the US Supreme Court allows the DC Circuit to have the final say. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if this case proves an exception.

Auness on Forthcoming Supreme Court Ruling on Navigability Test for Ownership of Beds and Banks of Water Bodies

2011-12-29T10:07:00.002-05:00

Over at Jurist.com, Richard Ausness (Univ. of Kentucky Law School) has an interesting assessment of the oral arguments in PPL Montana, LLC v. Montana, which represents the Roberts Court's first opportunity to decide a case of disputed ownership of the beds and banks of a body of water.

The state's claim is based on the constitutional "equal footing doctrine," according to which ownership of beds and banks of navigable water bodies passes from the federal government to state governments upon statehood. Since the Republic's inception, a persistent question has been what constitutes navigability for purposes of first federal, then state ownership. From Ausness' description of the questions raised during oral arguments, it sounds to me as if the conservative members of the Court are prepared to consider this issue de novo, that is, without regard to nearly two centuries of precedents (an approach the Roberts Court has previously undertaken in Citizens United, which overturned well-settled precedents extending back a century). At the oral arguments, Justices Alito and Scalia questioned whether the state really needs to own the beds and banks to protect navigation. But that should not be a pertinent question, as navigability has been the basis of state ownership (regardless of necessity) since the Republic's founding. A contrary ruling now would amount to brazen judicial activism.

The more liberal members of the Court seem to be angling to avoid deciding the case at all by characterizing it as a dispute between the federal government, which is not a party to the current dispute, and the State of Montana. Will this be another 5-4 decision in which Justice Kennedy determines the outcome?

Why Jens Is the Best

2011-12-28T17:19:00.002-05:00

See his column at Bicycling.com here.

Football Jargon

2011-12-27T17:24:00.002-05:00

From the Little Caesars Bowl: "Nice job of trickeration there" (spelling appoximate).

Two Points Lost: Arsenal 1 - Wolverhampton 1

2011-12-27T12:01:00.000-05:00

On paper this was an easy home match for the Gunners, but games aren't played on paper. Wolves hadn't scored (let alone won) at Arsenal in 34 years, that is until the first half of today's game. Arsenal were leading 1-0 after a fine goal by Gervinho (created by an equally fine through ball from Benayoun). Throughout the opening period, the Gunners heavily dominated possession. Wolves hardly threatened. But the Gunners once again displayed their susceptibility to set pieces on a corner kick, when Steven Fletcher headed in after a deflected shot. The score was 1-1 at the interval, but Gunners fans had every reason to believe that their side would finish off Wolves in short order in the second-half.

They didn't. Tried as they might, they could not get past the excellent Wayne Hennessey in Wolves' goal. The Gunners dominated possession throughout the second half, as they had in the first, and steadily increased the pressure on Wolves' defense. Arsenal's midfielders, especially Rosicky and Benayoun, made several good forward runs, but they were too focused on feeding the closely marked van Persie and sometimes missed better passing options.

The first real scoring chance of the second half came in the 67th minute (shortly after Arshavin came on for Benayoun), when a van Persie free kick was well saved by Hennessee. A moment later, Rosicky crossed well, with the outside of his right boot, finding Mertesacker, whose close-range header Hennessee likewise saved. Still, the Gunners pressed for the winning goal, and as the second half wore on the Wolves appeared to be hanging on for dear life. And that was before midfielder Nenad Milijas was shown a straight red card for lunging in on Mikel Arteta on the edge of Wolves' box with a quarter hour left to play. From that point on, nearly the entire Wolves squad was encamped in their own box, defending doggedly. Several more times, Arsenal came close, but they could not beat Hennessee, who was plainly man of the match.

A disappointing result for the Gunners, but their effort cannot be faulted. They deserved more than they got from the match.

Sen on Snakes and Ladders of the Global Economy

2011-12-27T08:25:00.000-05:00

The beyondbrics page of the Financial Times offers us all a holiday gift from Amartya Sen (if only we could find two more wise men, we'd be on to something).

An Opening for Arsenal

2011-12-26T12:02:00.002-05:00

Arsenal's match tomorrow at home against Wolverhampton Wanderers provides an opportunity for the Gunners to reclaim fourth place, after both Chelsea and Liverpool stumbled to draws today in matches against, respectively, Fulham and Blackburn. The Gunners currently sit one point ahead of Liverpool and two behind Chelsea with tomorrow's game in hand.

Between now and May, as the two teams from Manchester fight it out for the League championship, the real action will be the four-team fight for the last two Champion's League positions between Tottenham (currently in third), Arsenal, Chelsea, and Liverpool (I don't fancy Newcastle's chances of staying in the hunt).

An Unfinished Poem for the Day After Christmas

2011-12-26T10:04:00.001-05:00

It's a post-Christmas morning

And all through the house

Not a creature is stirring,

Not even my spouse.

A new week is dawning

And I must take an oath

To work or be lazy

For I cannot do both.

My own book to write

And others to read.

New classes to prepare,

But I'm going to seed.

I think I'll lie back down

And sleep like a log.

When I reawaken,

I'll return to this blog.

A Rare Christmas Day Bike Ride

2011-12-25T17:32:00.001-05:00

How often is it in the upper-40s and sunny on Christmas Day? Son of Cyclingprof accompanied me on a 20-mile jaunt out to Dolan and back. In something of a minor Christmas miracle, I made it all the way up Earl Young hill without getting off the bike.

A Perverse Sense of Humor?

2011-12-25T10:11:00.002-05:00

Why else would I choose Christmas Eve to start reading a biography of Baruch Spinoza, progenitor of the Enlightenment and bete noir of Reformation religious establishments (both Jewish and Christian)? The book is Steven Nadler, Spinoza: A Life (Cambridge 1999).

A Great Sen-tence and a Bad Review

2011-12-24T22:15:00.005-05:00

From Amartya Sen's article in the forthcoming Dec. 29, 2011 issue of The New Republic (behind a pay-wall here), "The Boundaries of Justice: David Hume and Our World":

The usefulness of reasoning is not dependent on its being able to solve every problem at hand.

Sen believes a contrary presumption has harmed decision theory and the theory of rational choice, and observes that understanding the incompleteness of our knowledge is in fact central to human reasoning.

Sen's observation is usefully borne in mind while reading the review of Jonathan Israel's Democratic Enlightenment, which appears in this Sunday's New York Times (here). I've previously blogged about the Israel book here and here. While some of the reviewer's criticisms hit the mark (Israel does too strongly distinguish and elevate radical enlightenment thinkers, such as Spinoza and Diderot, over their more moderate brethren, like Voltaire and Hume), the overall tenor of the review is far too glib and jaundiced, treating Enlightenment studies, and seemingly the pursuit of reason itself, as somehow passe.

Life Goes On

2011-12-24T14:55:00.000-05:00

Celebrating our first Hannukah/Christmas/Festivus since my mother's passing earlier this year. It's tough, but my wife and kids are trying to make it feel more normal for me by yelling at each other in the kitchen.

Grasping Defeat from the Jaws of Victory, By Winning

2011-12-22T23:30:00.002-05:00

I cannot believe the Colts are going to blow the Andrew Luck sweepstakes, although the Texans deserve a lot of credit for helping Indy secure the victory this evening.

In this morning's Indianapolis Star (here), Bob Kravitz asks: "Is there any such thing as a devastating victory?"

The New Arrival

2011-12-22T21:34:00.000-05:00

I'm proud to announce the arrival of a new bike in the Cyclingprof household, a healthy Bianchi Oltre Nero frameset measuring 59 cm and weighing in at about 1500 grams for the frame, fork, seatpost, and seatpost clamp. Here is generic photo of the bike (mine was sold in "like new" condition, having been ridden under 500 miles, but it looks absolutely brand new):

My build plan for the bike includes a new Campy Record 11 gruppo (2011/12) with a compact crankset and an 11-25 cassette, 3T Ergnova Team handlebar and ARX Team stem, Speedplay X2 pedals, a Specialized Toupe saddle, and HED Ardennes SL wheels. Total weight should be under 16 pounds (I'll weigh it and let you know after it's built).

High Market Valuations of Fossil-fuel Companies Do NOT "Contradict" Government Pledges to Reduce Carbon Emissions

2011-12-22T11:35:00.000-05:00

This "profound contraction" reportedly originated with Lord Nicholas Stern, who as an economist should know better, and has been publicized by Grist writer David Roberts (here and here). The claim is premised on a simplistic presumption that market valuations of fossil fuel companies are based (exclusively?) on the further presumption that all known reserves of fossil fuels will be extracted and sold, which cannot happen under government pledges to prevent global mean temperature increases beyond 2 degrees Celsius.

But the claim of a contradiction (either logical or as a matter of policy) is false because the premises and presumptions underlying it are false. In the first place, it is erroneous to presume that the market value of any company depends exclusively on its existing stock of assets, as if features such as (changeable) market demand, good will, and competition have no bearing on a company's value. Moreover, even if government regulations tie up some amount of carbon in the ground, that does not necessary mean that a coal company's market valuation must decline. Assuming demand is reasonably price elastic, so that the market price of coal rises as a consequence of reduced supply, fossil fuel companies could (in theory) remain equally profitable selling lower quantities of coal and oil at higher prices. They might also diversify into alternative, low-carbon energy sources, as many energy companies are in fact doing. Thus, the relation between a regulatory supply constraint does not necessarily equate with a reduction in overall profitability or market value for any particular company. (It is worth observing, in this context, that financial services companies like American Express and Wells Fargo are still highly valuable a century or more after their initial cartel-based transportation businesses were heavily regulated by the US government.)

It is even possible that regulations could increase the market value of a fossil fuel company that meets regulatory standards, for example, by improving productive efficiency. As former BP chairman Lord Browne bragged in a 2004 article in Foreign Affairs (here), his company reduced overall emissions by 10% (below 1990 levels), while increasing shareholder value by $650 billion, simply by reducing leaks and waste. Of course, because higher levels of emissions reduction are increasingly expensive emissions reductions do not invariably lead to direct increases to shareholder value. But just as companies have managed to increase profitability and market value despite increased costs of doing business (due to various market and non-market constraints) in the past, no reason exists simply to presume that (even stringent) GHG regulations would reduce their market valuations.

Even if a regulatory restriction did reduce the profitability and market valuations of fossil fuel companies, it is a mistake to conflate a mere "pledge" by governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with the actual imposition and enforcement of regulations (either quantitative or tax-based) that reduce either the supply or demand (or both) for carbon-based resources. The history of international climate negotiations to date suggests that "pledges" are worth little more than the paper on which they are printed. In other words, mere pledges do not equal credible commitments of the type generally required to move markets.

In short, there is no contradiction between government pledges made earlier this month in Durban and market valuations of companies that are heavily invested in fossil fuels.

Final Mercury Standards for Power Plants

2011-12-21T16:39:00.001-05:00

As promised the other day (see here), EPA has finalized new regulations on mercury emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants. The final rule in its entirety is here, and the regulatory impact statement, which includes the highly favorable cost-benefit analysis is here. For those who don't want to work so hard, a brief summary of the the rule is here.

New Bike

2011-12-19T23:44:00.002-05:00

I just bought a new bike (well, new to me). Details to follow, including photos, when it arrives.

How We Navigate Crowded Spaces

2011-12-19T08:35:00.000-05:00

The Economist has a fascinating story (here) about how humans (or "particles with a will") maneuver in groups on more or less crowded sidewalks, concourses, etc. Coincidentally, the story also describes how the pathology of religious fervor (ideology) undermines social norms that coordinate individuals' movement in crowded spaces.

Segal Targets ABA

2011-12-18T13:44:00.000-05:00

A new screed by the bete noir of legal academia, David Segal, in today's New York Times (here), takes on the American Bar Association (ABA) as overseer of American legal education. I never thought I say this about a David Segal article, but I actually agree with him about this: to a large extent, the increasing expense of a law school degree is driven by over- and outdated-regulation by the ABA. In fact, I deplore the monopolistic role of the ABA in legal education, and agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed by Andy Morriss in the article.

A couple of other points worth noting about Segal's article: He refers positively to a couple of law review articles, a genre he previously has suggested is comprised of worthless, theoretical drivel. And he quotes approvingly several law professors throughout his article, which suggests that he managed to find some members of the new "leisure class," who are hard-working, self-critical, and not resistant to change. I wonder if he's compiling a list of the few good ones.

Manchester City 1 - Arsenal 0

2011-12-18T13:17:00.002-05:00

This was always going to be a tough one for the Gunners. Man City's all-star team (with a stratospheric budget to match) are top of the league and virtually invincible at home, where they have lost none and drawn just two matches all year. That the Gunners did not win is disappointing, but they played hard and with poise, giving as good as they got for most of the game. Neither a victory nor a moral victory, but a tough loss from which the Gunners can take some solace about the quality of their side at the half-way point of the season.

Arsenal appeared nervous at the start (perhaps remembering their most recent trip to the City of Manchester, when they received an 8-2 drubbing from United). City, by contrast, started strong, with sharp, incisive passing that looked likely to cut open the Arsenal defense at will. Fortunately, the Gunners withstood the first ten minutes and gradually began to play themselves into the match. Both sides created decent scoring chances in the first 45, but City had more of them. Solid team defending by Arsenal and a couple of fine saves from Szczesny preserved the scoreless tie to halftime - not at all a bad outcome from the Gunners' perspective.

The Gunners play improved in the second half, creating as many or more chances than Man City; the only difference was that Man City converted one of their chances, when Silva scored from close range after Szczesny parried a hard shot by Balotelli. After the goal, Arsenal did not collapse but continued to attack, pressuring Man City's goal on many occasions. Robin van Persie missed one particularly good opportunity, and Vermaelen nearly scored twice toward the close. But no luck. Like every other Premier League team this season, Arsenal came away from the Etihad Stadium with no points.

Alex Song played exceptionally well for the Gunners, as did Szczesny, without whom game would have been lopsided. Indeed, the entire Gunners defense kept a good shape and played strong for most of the game (Koscielny's poor passing aside). Unfortunately, in midfield Arteta failed to make any impression on the game until midway into the second half; before that, he was virtually invisible. Likewise, Theo Walcott, who did nothing much with the ball on the few occasions when he had it in his possession. Walcott was replaced midway through the second half by Andrei Arshavin, who was even worse, wasting passes, possession, and one good scoring opportunity.

It is not a bad result for the Gunners, especially compared to their last trip to Manchester. The current Arsenal team is so much better than that Arsenal squad of August; it's like two completely different teams. The fact that some commentators are now writing Arsenal out of the title hunt is itself a significant indication of Arsenal's improvement. Only two months ago, they were sitting near the bottom of the table. Who would have imagined then that today's game would be considered, by some, to be a "must win" game for the league title?

Significant or Spurious Correlation?

2011-12-18T09:51:00.001-05:00

Am I the only one who's noticed the perfect correlation between my move to Bloomington and a dramatic improvement in the IU Men's Basketball team? I'm not saying I caused the improvement (it's at least possible that the improvement is due to my wife or kids moving here with me), but the coincidence is striking.

Here are some other spurious correlations recently posted at Crooked Timber:

EPA Finally Finalizes Air Toxics Rule for Mercury

2011-12-17T09:18:00.000-05:00

Not so much a "job-killing" regulation as a long-overdue protection (developed under court order) that finally will prevent utilities from committing involuntary manslaughter 17,000 times per year (not to mention hundreds of thousands of non-fatal assaults on public health).

According to this Washington Post story (the finalized rule is not yet available online), the new rule will force utilities, which are the largest emitters of air toxics in the US, to install scrubbers to remove emissions of mercury and soot, which will cost them $10.6 billion between now and 2016, but result in estimated mortality and morbidity cost savings of between $59 billion and $140 billion per year.

As soon as the final rule and regulatory impact assessment are available, I will link to them.

How to Distinguish Environmental Doomsaying from Rational Attention to Potential Envrionmental Catastrophes

2011-12-16T21:35:00.000-05:00

It's easy: If the concern is presented with full acknowledgement of risks (probabilities of occurrence) and uncertainties, it is not doomsaying but rational attention to potential environmental catastrophes. Doomsayers never talk about the relative (im)probabilities of the crises and catastrophes they foretell. With respect to climate change, for example, Al Gore (see, e.g., here) is a doomsayer; Martin Weitzman (see here) and Richard Posner (see here) are rational economists (which is not to say that they would necessarily agree about how much and how soon greenhouse gas emissions should be mitigated).

My New Commute

2011-12-14T16:15:00.000-05:00

Here's the profile (to and from, just under 10 miles round trip):

Ron Paul Wants to Abolish the EPA

2011-12-14T14:09:00.002-05:00

No surprise there. And he offers a conventional libertarian bromide as a substitute for the regulatory agency: "Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create...." For years, small minorities of economists and libertarians calling themselves "free-market environmentalists" (see, e.g., here and here) have argued that common-law property protections, by themselves, can and would supply efficient, even optimal, levels of environmental protection. They would certainly be right, if we lived in the mythical world of the "Coase theorem," in which information is complete and transacting is costless (see here). Indeed, if we lived in that world, we wouldn't even need property law or courts to resolve environmental disputes as parties in the free market would costlessly bargain to optimal allocations of pollution. But, as Coase himself acknowledged many times (see id.), the world we live in is not at all like the world of the "Coase theorem." In the real world, theories of free-market environmentalism are dangerously misguided because of transaction costs and the real limitations of common-law solutions to environmental problems.

Here's what Coase had to write about environmental protection in his 1959 article on "The Federal Communications Commission" (see here, p. 29):

[I]f many people are harmed and there are several sources of pollution, it is more difficult to reach a satisfactory solution through the market. When the transfer of rights has to come about as a result of market transactions carried out between large numbers of people or organizations acting jointly, the process of negotiation may be so difficult and time-consuming as to make such transfers a practical impossibility. Even the enforcement of rights through the courts may not be easy. It may be costly to discover who it is that is causing the trouble. And, when it is not in the interest of any single person or organization to bring suit, the problems involved in arranging joint actions represent a further obstacle. As a practical matter, the market may become too costly to operate.

In these circumstances, it may be preferable to impose special regulations (whether embodied in a statute or brought about as a result of the rulings of an administrative agency).

Peter Grossman and I build on Coase's arguments in Chapter 15 of our book, Principles of Law and Economics (Aspen 2011), pp. 397-8:

The causation-proof problems Coase recognizes are especially important. Many pollutants travel long distances, and pollution-related diseases can have long latency periods. To prevail in court, plaintiffs must be able to trace their harm to a particular pollution source that might be located hundreds of miles away, and prove that their harm was proximately caused by exposure to a certain pollutant that may have occurred several decades ago. This evidentiary burden is often unbearable, and always very expensive. Moreover, common-law courts have traditionally restricted nuisance remedies to cases involving visible air pollution, such as smoke and dust; bad odors were usually not enough to state a claim. But, of course, many harmful pollutants - including some of the most toxic - are invisible.

In addition to causation-proof problems, common-law remedies only protect environmental resources subject to property rights; they do not protect unowned, common-pool resources, regardless of social value.

The problems raised, respectively, by Coase and Cole and Grossman bear on Paul's belief that common-law causes of action provide sufficient remedies for environmental harms, but ultimately they are inapposite to his opposition to EPA and large-scale environmental regulation because Paul is not a welfare-consequentialist. As true-believing libertarian, Paul is more interested in maximizing individual liberty than overall social welfare (although he might believe that maximizing the former would maximize the later). Paul's strict libertarianism distinguishes him from his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination. While they mostly pander to anti-environmental interest groups, Paul's environmental position is principled. But, if implemented as policy, it would be disastrous for the health and welfare of the American people.

Workshop Mini-conference (and Book Parties)

2011-12-13T08:17:00.003-05:00

On of the wonderful and unique traditions at Lin and Vincent Ostrom's Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis here at IU is the "mini-conference," which is held at the end of each semester. The idea is to provide an opportunity for grad students (working toward their PhDs in various social-science departments) and visiting scholars (a dozen or more each semester from all over the world) to gain valuable experience in writing and presenting conference papers in a true workshop format. At the mini-conference, authors do not present their own papers; rather, they are presented and then critiqued by other scholars. The authors then have a short time for response prior to further comments, questions, and suggestions from the larger group.

This semester's mini-conference started yesterday and run's through this afternoon. This morning, I'm presenting an interesting paper by a grad student on how the Institutional Analysis and Design (IAD) framework (on which see, e.g., here) could improve Mancur Olson's analysis (in The Logic of Collective Action) of impediments to large-scale collective action.

While I'm on the subject of excellent traditions at the Workshop, I should mention "book parties," which are occasional events designed to provide feedback to Workshop-affiliated authors on manuscripts in progress. Workshop faculty, grad students, and even outside scholars from other institutions are each assigned a chapter of the draft book to review and critique at a day-long workshop (you can see why the Workshop is called the "the Workshop") We've had three book parties this semester, which may be one too many (time being a scarce commodity), but they're a great way for book authors to improve their manuscripts prior to publication.

I'm biased, of course, but if I were a grad student in any social scientific discipline, I would be attracted to do my dissertation at IU, first and foremost, because of the existence of the Workshop. It provides opportunities for collaborative learning, along with motivation and support, that are hard to find elsewhere.

Canada to Become First Country to Formally Withdraw from Kyoto Protocol

2011-12-12T21:10:00.002-05:00

While George W. Bush withdrew US support from the Kyoto Protocol, he did not withdraw the US signature. That is a step that no country has taken, until now. Today, Canada's conservative government announced that it would withdraw formally from the mitigation regime, under which it committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 6% from 1990 levels during the 2008-12 compliance period (see here). Its stated reason: because emissions from the US and China are not covered by the Protocol, the treaty cannot be an effective mitigation device and should be jettisoned in favor of something new. It's ulterior motive: oil sands, which give Canada the third largest quantity of known oil reserves in the world (after Saudi Arabia and Venezuela).

Producing oil from the sands is a potentially lucrative business (especially if the US eventually approves the Keystone pipeline), but also a very dirty business, emitting at least three times the carbon (not to mention other hazardous air pollutants) of conventional oil production processes (see here). So, Harper's government is not interested in a new and improved mitigation regime but with no mitigation regime at all.

This hardly makes Canada a special case; the US is in the same boat, which Japan and Russia reportedly are getting ready to climb aboard. Harper's ideal scenario was that Kyoto would die at Durban. That it did not must have been a disappointment to his government. Still, the timing of Canada's announcement is interesting, coming just a day after the end of the Durban meeting. Given the Kyoto Protocol's persistent weakness (bordering on irrelevance), Harper's conservative government hardly needed to withdraw from the Protocol at this point; it could have gone on ignoring it, as it has done since taking office after the 2006 elections. The move could well backfire in the same way that President Bush's 2001 denunciation of the Kyoto Protocol arguably backfired, by removing the US delegation's voice from the negotiating table.

Whatever the reasons and the timing, one point is perfectly clear (regardless of deceptive comments to the contrary from Canadian government officials): this decision is not about building a better international regime for reducing greenhouse gas emissions; it is about black oil and cold cash.

Text of the Durban Agreement

2011-12-12T08:51:00.000-05:00

Text of Durban Agreement

Climate Talks End in Victory or Defeat or Inevitable Compromise, Depending on Your Point of View

2011-12-11T08:10:00.003-05:00

The 2-page agreement (supposedly - the official text is not yet publicly available) commits all parties, including developing countries, to adopt binding emissions reduction targets by 2020 (see here). At least some parties hailed the agreement as a breakthrough, while others blasted it for transferring cuts from richer to poorer countries, and environmental groups lamented the failure to commit to early emissions cuts (see here and here).

From my perspective, getting China and India - two of the world's four leading emitters (in nominal terms) - on board with mandatory emissions cuts was an important achievement, and necessary to ensure that global emissions start trending downward. It is important to bear in mind, however, that this is just an agreement to take some action in the future. The actual commitments are yet to come.

I'm not so disturbed as some observers by the 2020 starting point for new binding emissions-reduction targets. For one thing, it's probably going to take at least that long to put large-emitting developing countries in a position, economically, institutionally, and technologically, to make verifiable cuts. For another, the 2020 start date does not prevent the attainment of large-scale cuts in carbon emissions between now and 2050; it just steepens the necessary reductions curve. Nor does it undo commitments countries or confederations, such as the EU, have made to reduce emissions between now and 2020.

However, this new agreement should not be confused with real action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is merely represents a more or less credible (depending on which party you're talking about) commitment to reduce emissions in the future. Between now and at least 2020 (and perhaps much longer after that), we should keep our eyes where the real action is, in Europe and California, which are leading the way as carbon-cutting entrepreneurs. Whether or not more countries follow their leads may be a more reliable signal of trends in global climate policy than any piece of paper the climatocrats signed in Durban.

I will post the agreement, when it becomes available.

Mancur Olson's "Logic of Collective Action" Encapsulated in Two Concise Sentences Written 200 Years Earlier

2011-12-10T22:16:00.006-05:00

Mancur Olson's Logic of Collective Action (Harvard 1965) is rightly celebrated as one of the most important works of political-economy in the past century. Among other things, it is a foundation stone of public choice theory. But did you know that the main thesis of Olson's 170-page book was expressed in just two sentences written 200 years earlier?

Here's David Hume, from the Treatise on Human Nature [1739-40], Book 3, Part 2, Sec. 7, p. 538 (1978):

Two neighbours may agree to drain a meadow, which they possess in common; because ‘tis easy for them to know each other's mind; and each must perceive, that the immediate consequence of his failing in his part, is, the abandoning the whole project. But ‘tis very difficult, and indeed impossible, that a thousand persons shou'd agree in any such action; it being difficult for them to concert so complicated a design, and still more difficult for them to execute it; while each seeks a pretext to free himself of the trouble and expence, and wou'd lay the whole burden on others.

Of course, what Hume doesn't provide and Olson does is a clear implication of the potential of minoritarian bias in political processes to rival, or even exceed, the problem of majoritarian bias which was pretty much the sole concern of political theorists of democratic republicanism prior to the second half of the twentieth century.

Heisman Trophy Goes to Robert Griffin III

2011-12-10T21:04:00.003-05:00

No Luck for Luck in the Heisman balloting. As a Stanford guy, I have to say he was robbed. Who truly believes that Griffin is a better player or more deserving winner than Luck? Anyone want to bet on the first player/quarterback taken in the next NFL draft?

Arsenal 1 - Everton 0

2011-12-10T11:59:00.001-05:00

Before the game, Arsenal celebrated their 125th anniversary as a club, and many great players from the past were in attendance. The current Gunners team chose to emulate not the goal-happy sides of recent memory, but the George Graham Gunners, when the motto was "1-nil to the Arsenal." Unlike those teams, however, they didn't do it so much through strong defending as by spurning a number of gilt-edged scoring chances (especially in the first half).

In the first half, the Gunners surgically cut Everton's defense to pieces on several occasions but failed to put the ball in the back of the neck (perhaps because none of the really good chances fell to van Persie). They really should have been up at least 3-0 by the break. It was frustrating, but instead of concern that Everton were still in the game and might steal a goal, my sense was that plenty more chances would come for the Gunners after the intermission, and that Everton's luck wouldn't last. I was wrong - not that Everton wouldn't steal a goal (they threatened occasionally but never really tested Szczesny), but that Arsenal would create plenty more gilt-edged chances. Everton's defense tightened in the second 45, and the Gunners found the chances fewer and farther between.

After a choppy start to the second half, the deadlock was finally broken in the 70th minute by a moment of brilliance from the Gunners, notably Song, who made a beautiful cross-field pass, and van Persie who put it in the back of the net with a perfectly hit, first-time volley. Everton goalie Tim Howard could only watch RvP's strike fly across him and crash in off the far post. Such an exquisite goal made up for all the missed chances of the first half, and effectively sealed the victory, as Everton could not manage to put a shot on goal.

The victory puts Arsenal up into fourth place (the last qualifying place for the Champion's League) in the Premiership, pending the outcome of Chelsea's big home match Monday against Man City.

Federal Courts of Appeal Cite Law Review Articles More than They Used To

2011-12-09T19:58:00.001-05:00

That's according to a new empirical study David L. Schwartz and Lee Petherbridge recently published in the Cornell Law Review (Vol. 96, pp. 1345-74, 2011). Here's the take away from their article:

The study reported here adds a substantially more comprehensive data set to this important body of work than previous studies: an assessment of citation to legal scholarship in 296,098 reported decisions of the federal courts of appeals between 1950 and 2008. Using clearly described and easily reproducible methods it further adds to the existing body of knowledge by empirically exploring the stridently pressed conventional wisdom that legal scholarship has drifted so far from the interests of the bench and bar that courts have little use for it.

The study produces two important results. First, the data collected support the interpretation that the use of legal scholarship by the federal circuit courts of appeals has not declined. Rather, the use of legal scholarship by such courts has increased. Taken together, the data gathered in this study call into serious question the conventional wisdom that courts have little use for legal scholarship.Second, the study provides evidence that a relatively small cohort of judges is responsible for the overwhelming majority of citations. Using empirical and theoretical methods, the study also considers explanations for the empirical results.

I wonder whether David Segal of the New York Times will retract the blanket claim he made in an article he wrote a couple weeks ago about the uselessness of legal scholarship (see here).

Tabarrok on Medical Patents

2011-12-09T07:45:00.000-05:00

Over at Marginal Revolution, Alex Tabarrok has an excellent post on the intellectual property bar's latest efforts to propertize everything, no matter what the social costs, including perverse consequences for research and innovation.

Man U and Man City Fail to Make Knock-Out Stage of Champion's League

2011-12-08T10:46:00.000-05:00

Arsenal fans are too high-minded to take much pleasure in the failings of the Gunners' Mancunian rivals. And if you believe that, could I interest you in purchasing the Brooklyn Bridge?

In any ordinary season, the early Champion's League exits of Man City and Man U arguably would be bad news for Arsenal because they would be playing fewer games, while focusing exclusively on success in the two other competitions that really matter: the Premiership and the FA Cup. This season, since Arsenal are unlikely to challenge for the Premiership crown, the early exit of the Manchester clubs matters less at least as far as that competition is concerned.

Olympiakos 3 - Arsenal 1

2011-12-06T21:24:00.000-05:00

Arsenal had already won the group, qualifying for the knock-out stage of the Champions' League; so they had little to play for today in Greece. Wenger started a side full of back-ups, with the exception of Vermaelen and, perhaps, Santos (who had to leave the game injured in the second half). Aside from a very fine volley from the classy Benayoun, Arsenal always looked second-best in this match. On to more important work this Saturday at home to Everton in the Premier League. Mikel Arteta should be looking forward to facing his old mates.

Economists Urge President Obama to Designate More Federally Protected Lands in the West to Stimulate the Economy

2011-12-05T10:34:00.000-05:00

An impressive list of 100 economists, including (among many others), Kenneth Arrow, Robert Solow, Joseph Stiglitz, Roger Noll, Eban Goodstein, Deirdre McCloskey, Richard Norgaard, Thomas Michael Power, and Richard Zerbe, signed the letter, which argues that "federal protected public lands," including national parks, national monuments, and wilderness areas, "are essential to the West's economic future" (emphasis added).

In the West ... public lands play a pivotal role in attracting and retaining people and businesses. This is the case for all sectors, including manufacturing.

The rivers, lakes, canyons, and mountains found on public lands serve as a unique and compelling backdrop that has helped to transform the western economy from a dependence on resource extractive industries to growth from in-migration, tourism, and modern economy sectors such as finance, engineering, software development, insurance, and health care.

The full letter with signature page is here.

A Provocative Assertion about the Conservatism of the Legal Profession in the 18th Century

2011-12-04T11:21:00.004-05:00

From Jonthan Israel, Democratic Enlightenment (Oxford 2011), pp. 231-2:

Modern historical surveys of the Enlightenment often seem to suggest that Europe's judicial systems could be and were swiftly and almost painlessly reformed in the eighteenth century, as if this was just a question of ending judicial torture, modifying the harsh treatment of debtors and unmarried mothers, and a few other widely acknowledged defects, and as if there was widespread support for the proposed changes in society and among the legal profession. But the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. Significant sections of the Enlightenment, and Hume in particular, systematically undermined every overall approach to rationalizing the law, thereby drastically limiting the scope for legal reform. In the legal and moral sphere, it was neither public opinion, nor economic pressure, nor governments, and especially not ... magistrates or lawyers that acted as agents of change. The legal profession in fact contributed practically nothing to the reform programme anywhere in Europe. Rather it was philosophy itself - and especially la philosophie moderne - helped by the sheer accumulation of social difficulties and pressures (as distinct from public attitudes), that spread awareness of deficiencies and urged root and branch reform.

I am not enough of a legal historian (especially of Europe in the 18th century) to adjudge the accuracy of Israel's strong claim. I suspect he is correct about the general conservatism of the legal profession, which seems a persistent quality. On the other hand, I find it hard to imagine that the successful legal reforms Israel discusses could have been achieved without at least the strong support, if not the instigation, of some enlightened magistrates and lawyers. If the legal profession, as a whole, possesses a conservative (perhaps Humean) mindset, the existence within that profession of a minority of reformers - both moderate and radical - seems another of its persistent qualities. Of course, Israel's apparent bias for the philosophes, especially those like Spinosa, Bayle, and Diderot with a more radical reform agenda, is understandable given his own heavy investment in their works. But it seems doubtful that they their works were the sole drivers of enlightened political, legal, and economic reform.

Wigan 0 - Arsenal 4

2011-12-03T15:18:00.000-05:00

Wigan really put up little resistance in this match, hardly ever threatening Szczesny's goal, while giving Arsenal's offense too much room to operate. The Gunners dominated possession, and their passing was more fluid than it has been perhaps all season. The most surprising aspect of this match is that van Persie only scored the fourth and final Arsenal goal (finishing off a fine play by Theo Walcott), preceded by the excellent Arteta (on a long-range shot that the goalie probably should have stopped but appeared not to see clearly), Vermaelen (heading in at the back post from a corner kick), and Gervinho (following up a parried shot from van Persie). From the point of view of an Arsenal fan, it was one of the few games this season that was a sheer pleasure to watch, without any nervous sense that the Arsenal defense might contrive to spoil it. Speaking of the defense, it's great to have Vermaelen back seemingly in top form, alongside Mertesacker, who had a better game today. Koscielny, who has really improved throughout this season, is proving to be something of a revelation on the left side of defense, where he's been forced to play because of injury. He's really getting up field to support the offense, passing the ball effectively, and covering defensively down his wing. Overall, things really are looking up for the Gunners, despite their loss in midweek to Man City in the Carling Cup quarterfinals.

From Global to Polycentric Climate Governance

2011-12-03T11:12:00.001-05:00

My recent article of that title, published in the journal Climate Law (Vol. 2, pp. 395-413, 2011) is now freely available online here (from the IU repository).

Washington Environmental Council v. Sturdevant

2011-12-02T22:07:00.002-05:00

Yesterday, Federal District Court Judge Marsha J. Pechman ruled (here) that Washington State agencies must promulgate technology-based standards for greenhouse gas emissions from oil refineries in the state. The decision is based on a highly technical (but not convoluted) reading of state regulations under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), according to which the state environmental agency must set RACT (reasonably achievable control technology) standards for certain categories of existing stationary sources (in this case oil refineries) pursuant to their State Implementation Plan (SIP).

The most interesting aspect of this opinion to my mind is that SIPs are a compliance tool for attaining (or maintaining) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs), which are set for criteria pollutants. To date, the EPA has not established criteria documents for greenhouse gases, which would lead to the promulgation of NAAQSs for them. Yet, the federal court did not hesitate to require Washington state agencies to include regulations in their SIPs for GHGs. As Judge Pechman notes in her ruling, nothing in the SIP provision (sec. 110) of the CAA restricts the state from regulating air pollutants beyond federal requirements. So long as the SIP "meets all the applicable requirements," EPA must approve it, even if it is more stringent than federal law requires. And it remains enforceable by both federal and state courts. In this case, the state's RACT regulations were broader than federal requirements in applying not only to criteria pollutants but to "all air contaminants." A 2009 executive order (09-05, May 21, 2005) by Washington Governor Christine Gregoire specifies that "greenhouse gases are air contaminants."

Presumably the State of Washington could easily avoid the court's order in this case simply by amending the language of its current RACT regulation to explicitly exclude GHGs. However, it may be politically difficult to for it to do so, given the 2009 executive order.

This is the first case (to my knowledge) where environmental groups have succeeding in regulating GHG emissions from existing (as opposed to new or substantially modified) stationary sources of greenhouse gas emissions under the CAA. The EPA has studiously avoided bringing GHGs under the general ambit of Title I of the CAA, which would require an endangerment finding (under sec. 108, separate from the endangerment finding EPA made under Title II for auto emissions of GHGs), issuing criteria documents, and promulgating NAAQSs (under sec. 109). Even in the absence of NAAQSs, emissions from new and substantially modified sources are subject to federal regulation because of broad language in the relevant sections of the statute. However, "existing" sources are not subject to direct federal regulation under the act (broadly speaking); rather, they are regulated by the states, pursuant to sec. 110 SIPs. The EPA must approve SIPs that meet certain federal requirements relating to attainment (or movement toward attainment) of NAAQSs. This case shows how language in state regulations, if it is sufficiently broad, can bring SIPs into play in regulating GHGs from existing stationary sources with technology-based standards.

Lawrence Friedman on the Aridity of Constitutional Law Scholarship

2011-12-02T18:23:00.003-05:00

I'm proud to say that Lawrence Friedman, America's foremost legal historian, was my mentor during (and after) my graduate legal studies at Stanford Law School. He remains among the most professionally impressive and personally influential scholars I have ever known, never wavering from his commitment to avoid writing anything dry and uninteresting.

Lawrence's most recent publication, "Law and Economics in Society," published in the Hofstra Law Review (Vol. 39, page 487), and presumably based on a lecture he gave there, is, as usual, full of wit and wisdom. In it, he criticizes some (but not all) practitioners of Law and Economics for ignoring both the limitations of economics and the advantages of other social-scientific approaches to understanding the operation of law in society. My favorite part of his new paper, however, is towards the end, where he laments that neither Law and Economics nor any of the other social scientific approaches to law have appreciably influenced certain "citadels" of legal scholarship, most notably constitutional law:

Most legal scholarship is sadly lacking in rigor and objectivity. Every year, law reviews publish thousands of pages of old-fashioned legal writing - blind to the realities of society, incurably solipsistic, and inbred. To be frank, constitutional law is a particularly arid field. It seems incurably devoid of interest in empirical data. Its very success, its very relevance to public issues, breeds scholarship that is either pure ideology and punditry, or the elaborate exposition of doctrines that make little or no difference to outcomes, to life in society, or reality. Most writing in the field is bloated, dismal, and biased. Many of the scholars seem eager only to spin out their own pet theories which rest on their own particular prejudices, and pass these off as some sort of eternal truth. As a legal historian, I find the pseudo-history of some constitutional lawyers, the habit of passing off their normative arguments as history, particularly irksome.... As an amateur legal sociologist, it bothers me that legal scholars seem so uninterested in whether doctrines and decisions make any difference in the real world. Maybe they assume that anything the Supreme Court says has some magic effect in society. Almost all of the "impact studies" come from political scientists. Nobody else seems to see any use for actual data. (495).

I agree entirely with Lawrence's argument, but even if you don't, you must admit it's not dull!

Robert H. McKinney School of Law

2011-12-01T14:47:00.001-05:00

Congratulations to my friends and colleagues at the Indiana University School of Law at Indianapolis, which has just been renamed the Robert H. McKinney School of Law after a $24 million gift (over $31 million including matching funds) from that prominent IU alum and Indianapolis attorney. Along with the new name, the law school gets funding for five faculty chairs to help recruit and retain nationally (and internationally) prominent faculty. Dean Gary Roberts has done a fabulous job securing the future of the law school, which is great news for all of IU.

The official IU news release is here. A video of the public announcement can be viewed here.

COP 17: Durban

2011-11-29T07:34:00.001-05:00

The 17th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change opened yesterday in Durban, South Africa. (If I hadn't already known it, I would have learned it from the literally dozens of announcements I received by e-mail yesterday and today of "side-events" hosted by the hoards of NGOs that follow the globally roving cocktail party that is the UN COP).

In contrast to past meetings, many of which opened with high hopes and much fanfare, the tone this year (as it was last year) is subdued, if not outright pessimistic. At the top of the agenda is answering the question of what happens when the Kyoto Protocol's compliance period expires on December 31, 2012? That issue was supposed to be put to rest two years ago at COP 15 in Copenhagen, but China (among other countries) scuppered those efforts (see here). Since then, progress towards a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol has been halting, and there is virtually no hope that a successor treaty will be adopted at this year's conference.

The European Union, which has taken its mitigation requirements more seriously than perhaps any other country (or collection of countries) in the developed world, has given up hope of a brand new treaty. Instead, it is calling for new commitments and a new compliance period under the old Kyoto treaty. But the US delegation, sounding more like Bush in 2001 than Obama in 2009, is already pouring cold water on that idea. The head of the US delegation, Jonathan Pershing, announced yesterday that the US will not support any successor treaty or Kyoto extension that does not include mandatory emissions reductions on high-emitting developing countries, including China and India (see, e.g., here). Everyone knows that the US Senate will not ratify the Kyoto Protocol or any other mitigation treaty if that condition is not met. Yet, the Obama Administration is probably naive to imagine that there are 60 votes in the Senate for any climate treaty he might sign. In any case, it is difficult to imagine that US negotiators could possibly cajole China and India into accepted binding mitigation targets to reduce nominal emissions for two reasons: (1) they are both developing countries with per capita income levels well below those of even the poorest developed countries; and (2) they have contributed much less than the US or EU to the existing stock of GHGs in the atmosphere. And by the way, China has at least credibly committed to reducing the carbon intensity of production in a way that requires deviation from business-as-usual emissions, which is more than can be said for the US. So, unless the US delegation stops its impotent posturing and adopts a more realistic negotiating position over the next two weeks, the failure of the Durban talks is assured from the start.

How likely is the US to do that? Not very. While the rest of the world may be focused on the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol compliance period at the end of December 2012, President Obama is focused on the first Tuesday in November 2012, when his own political future will be decided. In a country where politicians and the electorate are still debating well-settled questions of basic climate science, and China is widely perceived as a potent economic competitor, the US delegation's negotiating position has become a hostage to domestic political agendas. If China scuppered the Copenhagen negotiations for reasons that remain murky, the US can be expected to scupper the Durban negotiations for reasons easily explained by public choice theory.

Holding My new Book

2011-11-28T13:59:00.000-05:00

I received my editor's copies of Property in Land and Other Resources (Lincoln Institute 2011) today. It looks and feels great. Lin and I are very grateful to all the contributors and the editorial assistants at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

A Riddle

2011-11-28T10:57:00.000-05:00

I got this from one of my students this morning: If the opposite of pro is con, what's the opposite of progress?

The State of Higher Education

2011-11-27T08:29:00.000-05:00

Anthony Grafton offers an unusually balanced and sensible view, avoiding both the standard blame-game and facile solutions, here in the New York Review of Books.

Saturday Ride

2011-11-26T17:54:00.001-05:00

I got out late this afternoon for what I thought would be a short and easy recovery ride. I stayed off the hills, and just rode up Bethel to 45, south on 45 until I hit the tracks (blocked by a slow freight train), and then back north past New Unionville. Just as I was turning around to spin back home, it started raining, not especially hard, but hard (and cold) enough that, with 4-5 miles left to home, I didn't want to dally. So, now I need to recover from my recovery ride.

As the weather's supposed to be nasty tomorrow, I plan to head back north to Indy, where Coach Bob is holding a special 2-hour indoor training session. It's worth the two hours in the car just to work out with the group, rather than on my own in the basement.

Arsenal 1 - Fulham 1

2011-11-26T14:25:00.000-05:00

Having expected three points from this game at home to Fulham, Arsenal were disappointed to get just one. Looking tired following their Champions' League match against Borrusia Dortmund in midweek, the Gunners played a lackluster game at the Emirates, lacking pace and ideas. For all of their possession during the first half, they lacked a cutting edge in the final third. Fulham, playing mostly on the counterattack, had as many decent scoring chances as the Gunners.

The second half started just like the first, with Arsenal dominating possession and Fulham looking for opportunities on the counter. A few minutes after a van Persie shot was cleared off the line by a Fulham defender, Fulham turned an innocuous-seeming bit of possession at the other end into an own goal by Arsenal's Thomas Vermaelen. Fulham would have been up 2-0 a couple moments later but for the linesman's offside flag. With 20 minutes left, Arsenal were trailing a team that had never before beaten them at home.

Looking to light a fire under his team, Wenger brought on Gervinho and Abu Diaby (just back from a long injury layoff), replacing Aaron Ramsey and central defender Per Mertesacker. Diaby made an immediate impression, forcing a great save from Fulham goalie Mark Schwarzer on a header from a corner kick. Schwarzer could not, however, prevent the inevitable game-tying goal after the 80-minute mark. Thomas Vermaelen - making up for his earlier own-goal - authoritatively headed home an excellent cross by Theo Walcott.

From that point on, it was pretty much all Arsenal. Schwarzer saved a hard shot by Gervinho at the near post, and then a tamer effort by Walcott. But Arsenal could not create the game winner. If the Gunners had played the entire match as they did the last 15 minutes, they easily would have won this match. A disappointing result for the Gunners and their fans.

Van Persie did not score today, but his work rate and the intelligence of his movement without the ball were truly impressive. It's no wonder he generates so many scoring chances for others as well as himself; and of course his ability to finish is unparalleled in the Premiership. 38 goals in 42 games during 2011 says it all.

Tyler Cowen Pushes My Button Again

2011-11-26T08:31:00.002-05:00

In this post, he suggests that the impeding settlement of the NBA strike puts the Coase theorem "back in the saddle." I can only shake my head in dismay that someone so erudite and sensible has failed to read Coase carefully enough to avoid this elementary (and all too common) error.

UPDATE: Looking at the comments, after my own, to Tyler's post at Marginal Revolution, I am astounded at the depth and breadth of misunderstanding that persists relating to Coase's theories of transaction costs and social costs.

Day After Thanksgiving Ride

2011-11-25T16:52:00.001-05:00

I drove up to Indy this morning for what turned out to be quite a big group ride. A small group of us rode to the ride, which officially started at Nebo Ridge, from Traders Point. Another 20 or so riders met us there, including a former pro and several other really strong (and in-shape) riders. I knew I should have turned tail then. With a strong wind blowing from the south, we quickly rode north with Kirklin as our (initial) destination (part of the group would carry on from there to Frankfort, while other riders, myself included, would turn back south toward home). On the northern leg, I was riding between 25 and 27 mph heading north, but couldn't stay within a mile of the pack, riding at well over 30 mph.

By the time was started heading back south after the SAG in Kirklin, the wind was gusting to over 25 mph. It wasn't long before I lost my tether to the back of the group, and found my self riding into the wind on my own, suffering like a dog. Fortunately for me, the dynamic duo of Mark and Graham Dewart dropped back to pick me up and shepherd me (along with a couple other wayward sheep, err, riders) back home. I wound up with 64 miles on the day, but I can't honestly say it was a good ride, except in the sense that any ride I survive is a good ride.

It was good to see several of my old cycling buddies, even if I had only scant chance to talk with any of them (aside from Mark and Graham) because they were so far ahead of me.

Thanksgiving Day Ride

2011-11-24T13:59:00.001-05:00

Had time for just a couple circuits today. Two times west on Bethel, north on Old 37, east up Old Meyers Rd (which runs into Boltinghouse just before Bethel), and back west on Bethel. Only 14-15 total miles, but those two climbs up Old Meyers hill certainly give a good work-out and pre-burned at least some of the calories I'll consume later this afternoon. Tomorrow, I hope to burn off the rest at a group ride up in Indy.