Interview with Professor Monika Schnitzer
Our alumna Professor Dr Dr h.c. Monika Schnitzer studied Economics at the Faculty of Management, Economics and Social Sciences at the University of Cologne and graduated in 1986. She subsequently received her doctorate from the University of Bonn, where she also completed her habilitation in 1995. Since 1996, she has been a Professor of Economics at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich. She has also served as a visiting professor at prestigious U.S. universities including Stanford, Yale, Berkeley, and Harvard. For 20 years, Monika Schnitzer has advised the German federal government and the European Commission on economic policy issues. In April 2020, she was appointed to the German Council of Economic Experts, also known as “Wirtschaftsweisen”. Since October 2022, she has served as its chair– as the first woman in its nearly sixty-year history. Her research focuses on innovation, competition policy and multinational firms. In our alumni interview, we spoke with her about formative encounters and intellectual diversity during her time as a student in Cologne, about the challenge of translating scientific evidence into the political discourse, and about how chocolate cookies can sometimes lure even Nobel laureates to research seminars.
The transfer is most successful when both sides clearly understand their roles. This means that science must communicate transparently about its assumptions and limitations, and politics must take the evidence seriously without expecting perfect predictions about the future.
Dear Professor Schnitzer, you studied Economics at the WiSo Faculty and graduated in 1986. During your studies and later during your doctorate at the University of Bonn, you worked with Professor Eva Bössmann at the economics department. What memories or formative experiences do you associate with your time at WiSo?
It was a very stimulating time – both academically and personally. The variety of teaching styles and schools of thought had a formative influence on me. Eva Bössmann, the only woman at the faculty at the time, taught me early on to pay attention to US research, which was not at all common back then. Hans-Karl Schneider and Herbert Hax, who were both members and successive chairmen of the German Council of Economic Experts, incorporated their economic policy experience into their teaching and demonstrated how economic insights can be put into practice. In public finance, Klaus Mackscheidt and Karl-Heinrich Hansmeyer represented different approaches that helped me sharpen my own arguments. And then there were the young professors at the faculty, Bernhard Felderer and Werner Güth. I learned macroeconomics from one, and game theory from the other, a field that immediately fascinated me. Carl Christian von Weizsäcker joined the faculty during my doctoral studies. His research seminars were the scene of heated discussions, and it was not uncommon for the conversations to continue late into the night over a glass of Kölsch.
This diversity—everyone with their own way of thinking and arguing—inspired me to develop my own approach to economics. Outside of the lecture hall and the library, I was involved with AIESEC, which provided ample opportunity to interact with companies. It was this combination of theory and practice that I found particularly exciting at the time—and still do today.
This diversity—everyone with their own way of thinking and arguing—inspired me to develop my own approach to economics.
During your studies in Cologne, Economics at the WiSo Faculty was primarily influenced by ordoliberalism, the intellectual framework of the social market economy. From your current perspective and with your many years of experience: What do you think the WiSo stands for today, nearly 40 years later?
Our discipline has undergone enormous methodological developments, as has the breadth of topics covered. Empirical work with large data sets, field and laboratory experiments, and methodologically sound impact analyses are now standard; this is also very evident at the WiSo Faculty, which has a strong international profile and presence. At the same time, the curriculum has become broader and more modular. For example, the Department of Economics—a structure that did not exist when I was a student—now allows students to immerse themselves in nearly all subfields and specialise in a much more individualised way.
You have been a member of the German Council of Economic Experts, also known as the “Wirtschaftsweisen”, since 2020. In 2022, you were appointed chairwoman. How would you describe the council‘s core mission—as an observer, a warning voice, or a driving force for economic policy reforms?
Ideally, all of the above. What makes the Council of Economic Experts unique is its statutory mandate. We are responsible for presenting the overall economic situation and its foreseeable development while also pointing out potential adverse developments. Since my appointment in 2020, we have experienced several crises, resulting in a high demand for analysis from both politicians and the public. It is crucial that we justify our assessments on a scientifically sound basis, ideally with empirical evidence. This also illustrates how much Economics has changed. When I was a student, empirical studies played a much smaller role than they do today.
We wrestle with arguments in several rounds and, in the end, with every sentence, sometimes even individual words. We usually find a workable compromise.
There are four other economists on the council besides you, including Professor Achim Truger, also an alumnus of the WiSo Faculty, and Professor Veronika Grimm, who completed her habilitation at the WiSo Faculty. How does the council handle different economic schools of thought and intense internal discussions to arrive at joint recommendations in the end?
The Council is unique here, too. Traditionally, one member is nominated by the employees side and one by the employers side, while the federal government nominates three additional member. Nominations are staggered, with one new member joining or one member's term extending each year. This ensures that the council‘s composition changes regularly, bringing in new expertise and perspectives.
We meet once or twice a month for a few days and more frequently during the drafting phase of the report. We wrestle with arguments in several rounds and, in the end, with every sentence, sometimes even individual words. We usually find a workable compromise. And if not, there is a transparent rule: dissenting opinions can be published as minority votes.
Thanks to research stays at U.S. universities such as Stanford, Yale, Berkeley, and Harvard, you also have an international perspective. How has this influenced your economic assessments and your academic work?
These experiences had a lasting impact on my economic outlook, especially my commitment to methodological rigor. Time and again, I experienced the importance of academic discourse: the intensive, critical examination of results, the constant testing of assumptions, and pressing further until a claim really holds. This international exchange continues to help me until this day to classify issues more quickly and formulate courses of action that are both scientifically sound and context-sensitive. I also learned there how incentives work. There was usually a “free lunch” at the research seminars. So the room was always well filled, and even the occasional Nobel Prize winner stopped by to grab a chocolate cookie.
There was usually a “free lunch” at the research seminars. So the room was always well filled, and even the occasional Nobel Prize winner stopped by to grab a chocolate cookie.
As the chair of the German Council of Economic Experts, you have a high public profile. You have also advised politicians and institutions for many years. Are there any typical misunderstandings when scientific expertise is incorporated into political discourse? How can this transfer be made as successful as possible?
A common misconception is that science must provide clear, definitive answers. However, serious scientific analyses always emphasise the limits of what they can tell us, uncertainties, and assumptions—and rightly so. Politics, on the other hand, must make decisions and needs guidance to do so. Research provides scenarios and probabilities, not certainties. The transfer is most successful when both sides clearly understand their roles. This means that science must communicate transparently about its assumptions and limitations, and politics must take the evidence seriously without expecting perfect predictions about the future. Open, continuous exchange is crucial for this.
Before we finish, could you please complete the following sentence: When I think back to my time as a student in Cologne, I remember...
... long hours in the library, heated discussions over Kölsch in the evening, inspiring museum visits, and magnificent Philharmonic concerts at the weekends–not to mention lots of crazy revelry during the carnival season.
Is there anything else would you like to share with our current students? Do you have three tips for studying?
First, be curious. The most exciting insights often arise from unexpected questions.
Second, be critical when dealing with information and data, and question their reliability. This skill will be crucial in almost every professional field.
Third, actively seek out exchange. Good ideas rarely arise alone, but rather in conversation with people who think differently than you do.
Dear Professor Schnitzer, thank you very much for your time and for this interview!
Questions by Pascal Tambornino