In the rarified atmosphere at Harvard, becoming a Professor (a “full”, or “actual” professor) is considered quite an honor, and is usually not bestowed on anyone who isn’t genuinely a world caliber expert in their field, or at least the chairperson of a dept (who at Harvard is also usually a world expert). That generally means a bare minimum of 15 years of experience and a substantial body of scholarly work. People who never attain the rank of full professor at Harvard routinely leave to be instantly granted that rank at “lesser” institutions (ie that would be considered any institution other than Harvard). So the title is quite coveted, and considering the notoriously lousy pay at Harvard, the importance of academic rank is amplified.

So that said, Hanson’s title actually is “Professor” at Harvard Law School. The catch is, the ranking system at HLS is a bit different than at the rest of Harvard. Everywhere else, there are “assistant” professors, “associate” professors, then (full) professors. Harvard Med school takes this craziness even one step further with yet another gratuitous non-professor rank of “lecturer”.

At HLS, the entry rank of lawyers fresh out of law school is “assistant professor”. About five years experience and appropriate scholarly work may buy you a promotion to “professor”, which is what Hanson is. But though the titles are the same, Viscusi is correct in pointing out that Hanson’s academic rank is inferior to his own. At HLS the equivalent rank to Viscusi’s would be an endowed Professorship, like for example Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law (or Dr. Viscusi, John F. Logan Professor of law). Unlike Viscusi, Hanson lacks that credential, meaning he truly is NOT the same kind of “professor” that Viscusi is.

In terms of doctorates, Hanson is a lawyer with a doctorate of jurisprudence. So technically, Hanson is a “doctor” just as “Ms.” Crocker is a doctor, Judge Kessler is a doctor, and every other lawyer in that giant courtroom full of lawyers are doctors! But considering that that the title of “doctor” is generally reserved for medical/health profession doctors or persons with dissertation level scientific degrees (and usually additional postgraduate research), and considering that “Dr”. Hanson presumeably doesn’t use that title in his professional capacity as a lawyer, it isn’t odd that Viscusi chafes a bit at the use of that term. Frankly, I don’t think lawyers should be called “doctors” either, and neither do most of the lawyers I know!

In terms of pay, as any economist (Harvard or not!) will tell you, expert witnesses are paid what the market can bear. That Viscusi can command the remarkably stiff fee of $850 per hour as an expert speaks to his ability and experience. Its not only what he has to say, but also the tremendous clout his credentials and experience bring to what he has to say that command the exhorbitant price.