I was reading an article about the John Ritter wrongful-death trial, when I came upon the following sentence (emphasis mine):
"In other testimony, forensic economist Tamara Hunt said that if Ritter had lived and his show had continued for seven years he could have earned nearly $41.9 million."
Wait...what? I'd never heard of forensic economics and its' practitioners before, so I decided to google the term. I guess I'm pretty oblivious to what is going on around me, because I found that the field has it's own association and peer-reviewed journal.
What does a forensic economist do exactly? According to the previously linked website:
"Forensic economics is the scientific discipline that applies economic theories and methods to the issue of pecuniary damages as specified by case law and legislative codes. Topics within forensic economics include (1) the analysis of claims involving persons, workers, firms, or markets for evidence concerning damage liability; (2) the calculation of damages in personal and commercial litigation; and, (3) the development and use of generally accepted forensic economic methodologies and principles. [Definition adopted by NAFE Board of Directors, 11/6/2006]"
Who chooses to become a forensic economist? I always hear people talk about how they want to become labor or development or IO or applied micro economists. I've never heard anyone say that they wanted to become a forensic economist. Given the setting in which I learned about all this, my first thought was that the field was populated by opportunistic hacks (insert your behavioral economics insight here). However, this is probably wrong: according to the wikipedia page on the topic, "a doctorate degree in economics is the usual qualification of forensic economists." (Though I suppose it's possible to be an opportunistic hack with a PhD...).
So, which doctoral students choose to become forensic economists? I have no idea, but will let you know if I find out. In the meantime, here is yet another area where there is demand for economists (or people with economics training) to come in and help make sense of the world.
1 comment:
I suspect your "opportunistic hacks with PhDs" comment may not be too far off, at least in terms of those who are testifying for trials. Though the more actuarial aspect seems well suited to economists.
Could be a welcome shift from the global health tip of things, Atheen...
Post a Comment