What matters for an award is that people recognise it as a prestigious accolade.
The economics prize, while not “official”, is still recognised by everyone in economics as the highest honour in the field. Who cares if it’s “official” or not?
Awards and prizes derive their value from their social recognition, which it has a solid amount of, at the very least.
You may not care about the distinction, and if so that's your prerogative, but this Memorial prize in Economics, despite sharing in the festivities, is not in the same category and that's what you keep running into seeing pointed out.
Nobody but a few nitpicks care about your distinction because it's not a real one. Might as well say "Money is not valuable because the material it's made up of has little intrinsic value". Well no, Money is valuable because society has decided it is.
Sure
>You claimed you come across this a lot and don't get it. I just told you. Take it or leave it.
I'm not OP. And i don't think a few comments on Nobel prize threads is a lot in the first place. Nothing for me to "take".
Of course that doesn't matter to anybody else, but I could see it mattering to the laureates themselves.
Yes.
It's awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, who also award the Physics and Chemistry prizes. Its winner is announced with the winners of the original prizes. The winner in included in the annual Nobel Prize Award ceremony in Stockholm, and receives a medal, diploma, and monetary grant award document from the King of Sweden at that ceremony. The Nobel Foundation counts it when they say their are 6 prize categories, and includes its winners on their lists of Nobel laureates.
It only differs from say the Chemistry prize in that it was established in memory of Nobel instead of by Nobel and the prize money doesn't come from Nobel's estate.
Perhaps if the ACM renamed the Turing Award to "The Alfred Nobel Memorial Prize in Computer Science", the Nobel Foundation would let them get away with it.