My father, a methodical man, recorded in
his diary that I was born at 3:25 p.m. on December 29th, 1910.
The place was a house, containing two flats of which my parents
occupied the lower, in a suburb of London, Willesden. My father
was a telegraphist in the Post Office. My mother had been
employed in the Post Office but ceased to work on being married.
Both my parents had left school at the age of 12 but were
completely literate. However, they had no interest in academic
scholarship. Their interest was in sport. My mother played tennis
until an advanced age. My father, who played football, cricket
and tennis while young, played (lawn) bowls until his death. He
was a good player, played for his county and won a number of
competitions. He wrote articles on bowls for the local newspaper
and for Bowls News.
I had the usual boy's interest in sport but my main interest was
always academic. I was an only child but although often alone, I
was never lonely. When I learnt chess, I was happy to play the
role of each player in turn. Lacking guidance, my reading (in
books borrowed from the local public library) was
undiscriminating and, as I now realize, I was unable to
distinguish the charlatan from the serious scholar. My mother
taught me to be honest and truthful and although it is impossible
to escape some degree of self-deception, my endeavours to follow
her precepts have, I believe, lent some strength to my writing.
My mother's hero was Captain Oates, who, returning with Scott
from the South Pole and finding that his illness was hampering
the others, told his companions that he was going for a stroll,
went out into a blizzard and was never heard of again. I have
always felt that I should not be a bother to others but in this I
have not always succeeded.
Aged 11, I was taken by my father to a phrenologist. What the
phrenologist said about my character was, I feel sure, determined
less by the shape of my skull than by the impressions he derived
from my behaviour. Out of the various printed summaries of
character in his booklet, that chosen for "Master Ronald Coase"
started: "You are in possession of much intelligence, and you
know it, though you may be inclined to underrate your abilities."
This printed summary also included the following remarks: "You
will not float down, like a sickly fish, with the tide... you
enjoy considerable mental vigour and are not a passive instrument
in the hands of others. Though you can work with others and for
others, where you see it to your advantage, you are more inclined
to think and work for yourself. A little more determination would
be to your advantage, however." In the written comments, the
pursuits recommended were: "Scientific and commercial banking,
accountancy. Also, horticulture and poultry-rearing as hobbies."
Added were some comments about my character: "More hope,
confidence and concentration required - not suited for the
aggressive competitive side of business life. More active
ambition would be beneficial." It was also noted that I was too
cautious. It was hardly to be expected that this timid little boy
would one day be the recipient of a Nobel Prize. That this
happened was the result of a series of accidents.
As a young boy I suffered from a weakness in my legs, which
necessitated, or was thought to necessitate, the wearing of irons
on my legs. As a result I went to the school for physical
defectives run by the local council. For reasons that I do not
remember I missed taking the entrance examinations for the local
secondary school at the usual age of 11. However, as the result
of the efforts of my parents I was allowed to take the secondary
school scholarship examination at the age of 12. The only thing I
now remember is that at the oral examination I caused some
amusement by referring to a character in Shakespeare's Twelfth
Night as Macvolio. However, this lapse was not fatal and I
was awarded a scholarship to go to the Kilburn Grammar School.
The teaching there was good and I received a solid education. I
particularly remember our geography teacher, Charles Thurston,
who introduced us to Wegener's hypothesis on the movements of the
continents long before it was generally accepted and who also
took us to lectures at the Royal Geographical Society, one of
which, on river meanders, discussed the effect of the earth's
rotation on the course of rivers. I took the matriculation
examination in 1927, which I passed, with distinction in history
and chemistry.
It was then possible to spend the two years after matriculation
at the Kilburn Grammar School studying for the intermediate
examination of the University of London as an external student, which
covered the work which would have been taken during the first
year at the University as an internal student. I then had to
decide what degree to take. The answer was in fact determined by
one of those accidental factors which seem to have shaped my
life. My inclination was to take a degree in history, but I found
that to do this I would have to know Latin and having arrived at
the Kilburn Grammar School at 12 instead of 11, there had been no
possibility of my studying Latin. So I turned to the other
subject in which I had secured distinction and started to study
for a science degree, specialising in chemistry. However, I soon
found that mathematics, a requirement for a science degree, was
not to my taste and I switched to the only other degree for which
it was possible to study at the Kilburn Grammar School, one in
commerce. Although my knowledge of the subjects on which I was
examined was rudimentary, I managed to pass the intermediate
examinations and went to the London School of
Economics in October, 1929 to continue my studies for a
Bachelor of Commerce degree. I took a hodgepodge of courses for
Part I of the final examination, which I passed in 1930.
For Part II, I specialised in the Industry Group. I then had an
extraordinary stroke of luck, another accidental factor which
would affect everything I was to do subsequently. Arnold Plant,
who had previously held a chair at the University of Cape
Town, South Africa, was appointed Professor of Commerce (with
special reference to Business Administration) at the London
School of Economics in 1930. I attended his lectures on business
administration but it was what he said in his seminar, which I
started to attend only five months before the final examinations,
that was to change my view of the working of the economic system,
or perhaps more accurately was to give me one. What Plant did was
to introduce me to Adam Smith's "invisible hand". He made me
aware of how a competitive economic system could be coordinated
by the pricing system. But he did not merely influence my ideas.
My encountering him changed my life. I passed the B. Com, Part II
final examination in 1931, but having taken the first year of
University work while still at school and three years residence
at the London School of Economics being required before a degree
could be awarded, I had to decide what to do in this third year.
Among the subjects studied for Part II, the one I had found most
interesting was Industrial Law and what I had decided to do was
to study in this third year for the degree of B.Sc. (Econ), with
Industrial Law as my special subject. Had I done so I would
undoubtedly have gone on to become a lawyer. But that was not to
be. No doubt as a result of Plant's influence, the University of
London awarded me a Sir Ernest Cassel Travelling Scholarship and
although I did not know it, I was on the road to becoming an
economist.
I spent the academic year 1931-32 on my Cassel Travelling
Scholarship in the United States studying the structure of
American industries, with the aim of discovering why industries
were organized in different ways. I carried out this project
mainly by visiting factories and businesses. What came out of my
enquiries was not a complete theory answering the questions with
which I started but the introduction of a new concept into
economic analysis, transaction costs, and an explanation of why
there are firms. All this was achieved by the Summer of 1932, as
the contents of a lecture delivered in Dundee in October 1932,
make clear. These ideas became the basis for my article "The
Nature of the Firm", published in 1937, cited by the Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences in awarding me the 1991 Alfred Nobel Memorial Prize
in Economic Sciences. The delay in publishing my ideas was partly
due to a reluctance to rush into print and partly to the fact
that I was heavily engaged in teaching and research on other
projects. I held a teaching position at the Dundee School of
Economics and Commerce from 1932 to 1934, at the University of
Liverpool from 1934 to 1935 and at the London School of
Economics from 1935 on. At the London School of Economics I was
assigned a course on the economics of public utilities in
Britain. In 1939, the Second World War broke out and in 1940 I
entered government service doing statistical work, first at the
Forestry Commission and then at the Central Statistical Office,
Offices of the War Cabinet. I returned to the London School of
Economics in 1946. I then became responsible for the main
economics course, "The Principles of Economics", and also
continued with my research on public utilities, particularly the
Post Office and broadcasting. I spent nine months in 1948 in the
United States on a Rockefeller Fellowship studying the American
broadcasting industry. My book, British Broadcasting: A Study
in Monopoly, was published in 1950.
In 1951, I migrated to the United States. I went first to the
University of Buffalo and in 1959, after a year at the Center for
Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, I joined the economics
department of the University of Virginia. I maintained my interest in
public utilities and particularly in broadcasting and during my
year at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences,
I made a study of the Federal Communications Commission which regulated
the broadcasting industry in the United States, including the
allocation of the radio frequency spectrum. I wrote an article,
published in 1959, which discussed the procedures followed by the
Commission and suggested that it would be better if use of the
spectrum was determined by the pricing system and was awarded to
the highest bidder. This raised the question of what rights would
be acquired by the successful bidder and I went on to discuss the
rationale of a property rights system. Part of my argument was
considered to be erroneous by a number of economists at the
University of
Chicago and it was arranged that I should meet with them one
evening at Aaron Director's home. What ensued has been described
by Stigler and others. I
persuaded these economists that I was right and I was asked to
write up my argument for publication in the Journal of Law and
Economics. Although the main points were already to be found
in The Federal Communications Commission, I wrote another
article, The Problem of Social Cost, in which I expounded
my views at greater length, more precisely and without reference
to my previous article. This article, which appeared early in
1961, unlike my earlier article on "The Nature of the Firm", was
an instant success. It was, and continues to be, much discussed.
Indeed it is probably the most widely cited article in the whole
of the modern economic literature. It, and The Nature of the
Firm were the two articles cited by the Royal Swedish Academy
of Sciences as justification for awarding me the Alfred Nobel
Memorial Prize. Had it not been for the fact that these
economists at the University of Chicago thought that I had made
an error in my article on The Federal Communications
Commission, it is probable that The Problem of Social
Cost would never have been written.
In 1964, I moved to the University of Chicago and became editor
of the Journal of Law and Economics. I continued as editor
until 1982. Editorship of the journal was a source of great
satisfaction. I encouraged economists and lawyers to write about
the way in which actual markets operated and about how
governments actually perform in regulating or undertaking
economic activities. The journal was a major factor in creating
the new subject, "law and economics". My life has been
interesting, concerned with academic affairs and on the whole
successful. But, on almost all occasions, what I have done has
been determined by factors which were no part of my choosing. I
have had "greatness thrust upon me".
From Les Prix Nobel. The Nobel Prizes 1991, Editor Tore Frängsmyr, [Nobel Foundation], Stockholm, 1992
This autobiography/biography was written at the time of the award and later published in the book series Les Prix Nobel/Nobel Lectures. The information is sometimes updated with an addendum submitted by the Laureate. To cite this document, always state the source as shown above.
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1991