Tim Smeeding reflects on his career upon retirement

The 2022-23 academic year capped off an illustrious career for Professor Tim Smeeding, who retired after five decades in academia. Professor Smeeding’s work has contributed to understanding poverty and inequality, and how to design more effective programs to reduce them. In his career he has written or edited 24 books, 271 peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and numerous policy reports that have helped inform public policy. He also co-founded the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) in 1983 and served as its founding director through 2006. Professor Smeeding joined the La Follette School in 2008, returning to UW–Madison where he received his master’s and doctoral degrees in economics in the early 1970s. An accomplished and award-winning teacher who impacted the lives of countless students during his career, he helped to design and teach the initial gateway course in the La Follette School’s popular undergraduate certificate program in public policy. The La Follette School is grateful to Professor Smeeding for his incredible contributions to students, scholarship, and the school’s development. Learn more about Professor Smeeding’s career in this Q&A:
And in February ’83, I met Lee Rainwater, a sociology professor at Harvard, for the first time in Washington. We had dinner and he became convinced that I could do this. And we started the LIS in April 1983.
Then in 1984, economist-turned-demographer Sam Preston wrote an important paper comparing children and the elderly in America. It turned out the elderly were doing great, and children were doing terribly. I really took that to heart and decided to look at children and the elderly across countries using LIS. And it turns out other countries treated their children much better than we did. That turned into a book, The Vulnerable. But it took until 2003 for Lee Rainwater and I to really make the case for it in Poor Kids in a Rich Country.
I also examined income and wealth inequality cross-nationally. We had more inequality in both measures than any other rich country. We still do. And the LIS research which allowed greater comparability is still the gold standard today for comparative policy outcome work.
Much of my success is because my work appealed to public policy scholars, policymakers, and those in other social sciences. Most economists were more theoretical or more interested in methods than results; they wanted to speak to other economists. But I wanted to convince policymakers and non-economists about policies that worked. As I matured, I found that the people closest to me were sociologists like Lee Rainwater or applied economists like Anthony (Tony) Atkinson. And so, from then on, I was writing for and in public policy, political science, sociology, demography, and statistical journals, as well as in applied economics journals.
What sparked your academic interest in studying poverty and inequality?
I grew up a Catholic and I had a strong Jesuit education. The Jesuits believed that there was a moral case for addressing poverty. Not knowing what field I wanted to study, I started out as a math major in college, but discovered that I really wasn’t interested in math so much as numbers. In my junior year, I took my first economics course, and the math and the numbers just fit well for me. I started out at Connecticut in a doctoral program in economics where there were two professors who saw my potential and encouraged me to think bigger. And so, I went to look at Madison. In one day, I met Gene Smolensky, Jeffrey Williamson, and Art Goldberger – people whose work I was reading. They were very supportive, and so that was it, that’s where I wanted to go. But I needed support. Halfway through my final math econ exam at Connecticut, I got a phone call. UW–Madison wanted to offer me a research assistantship starting in the summer at the Institute for Research on Poverty. And I said, “Great, I’m coming. I’ll take it.” By the time of my dissertation, I was looking at something to do with poverty. And I finally ended up, at Bob Haveman’s urging, to become the first person to look at the effect of in-kind transfers on poverty. Food stamps, Medicaid, and public housing were the three things I worked most on. Much of what I did on those topics became Census Bureau policy in the 1980s, but the topics are still being debated. It was through this area of study that I met Rebecca Blank, who became a lifelong friend and colleague.What are some ways that research focused on poverty and inequality has changed since you entered the field?
Research has changed in a lot of ways as inequality has increased and poverty proved hard to remedy. There weren’t big changes in inequality in the ’70s because incomes rose more uniformly across the distribution during post-World War II America. But in the early 1980s inequality really took off. For me personally, 1982-83 were both big years. The Census Bureau published my study of in-kind transfers (pdf) and poverty. There was a conference at Clark University about international comparisons of poverty. Everybody came from their country with their own paper, but they all measured poverty using different methods and concepts. In the end, no one could compare outcomes. And so, two colleagues said, “We could do better, but it would be a lot of work to harmonize this data. Who’d be crazy enough to do something like that?” And they said, “Tim.”
Smeeding was a lifelong friend and colleague of Chancellor Emerita Rebecca Blank who also studied the measurement of poverty.