Direction des Études et Synthèses Économiques

G 2015 / 03

The Impacts of Urban Public Transportation: Evidence from the Region

Thierry MAYER et Corentin TREVIEN

Document de travail

Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques INSTITUT NATIONAL DE LA STATISTIQUE ET DES ÉTUDES ÉCONOMIQUES

Série des documents de travail de la Direction des Études et Synthèses Économiques

G 2015 / 03

The Impacts of Urban Public Transportation: Evidence from the Paris Region

Thierry MAYER * et Corentin TREVIEN **

FÉVRIER 2015

Les auteurs remercient Leah BROOKS , Benjamin BUREAU , Pauline GIVORD , Laurent GOBILLON , Miren LAFOURCADE , Claire LELARGE , Corinne PROST , Roland RATHELOT , Rosa SANCHIS -GUARNER , Elisabet VILADECANS -MARSAL et Nicolas WAGNER pour leurs remarques et suggestions. Ce travail a également bénéficié des commentaires des participants aux séminaires internes de l’Insee et du Crest, aux séminaires Fourgeaud, RUES, MEDDE et aux conférences de l’EEA, de l’ERSA et au workshop de l’IEB. Les auteurs remercient la bibliothèque de l’IAU-IDF et Danièle Bastide pour leur avoir donné accès à certaines données utilisées pour cet article. Ce travail a bénéficié du soutien financier de la Société du .

______

* Sciences-Po, CEPII et CEPR, 28, rue des Saints-Pères, 75007 PARIS

** Département des Études Économiques - Division « Marchés et Entreprises » Timbre G230 - 15, bd Gabriel Péri - BP 100 - 92244 CEDEX

Département des Études Économiques - Timbre G201 - 15, bd Gabriel Péri - BP 100 - 92244 MALAKOFF CEDEX - - Tél. : 33 (1) 41 17 60 68 - Fax : 33 (1) 41 17 60 45 - CEDEX - E-mail : [email protected] - Site Web Insee : http://www.insee.fr

Ces documents de travail ne reflètent pas la position de l’Insee et n'engagent que leurs auteurs. Working papers do not reflect the position of INSEE but only their author's views. 2

L’impact des transports urbains : l’exemple du RER en Île-de-France

Résumé

L’évaluation des infrastructures de transport est complexe du simple fait que les lignes de chemin de fer ne sont pas localisées au hasard. Afin d’identifier l’effet causal du transport ferré sur la localisation des entreprises, de l’emploi et de la population, ce travail utilise l’expérience naturelle offerte par l’ouverture et l’extension progressive du Réseau express régional (RER) entre 1970 et 2000 dans la région parisienne et plus particulièrement les modifications apportées aux schémas initiaux du fait de contraintes budgétaires et techniques. Une stratégie en différence-de-différences est appliquée à un sous-échantillon de communes, choisies pour éviter le biais d’endogénéité lié à l’évaluation des infrastructures de transport. Ainsi, la croissance de l’emploi serait supérieure de 12,8 % dans les communes reliées au RER par rapport aux communes desservies uniquement par des trains de banlieue. En outre, les zones situées à moins de 20 km de Paris sont les seules impactées. Enfin, alors qu’aucun effet n’est trouvé sur la croissance de la population dans son ensemble, les résultats suggèrent que la mise en place du RER aurait pu induire une plus grande concurrence foncière que traduit une probabilité plus forte de localisation des ménages qualifiés à proximité des stations.

Mots-clés : Évaluation des politiques publiques, Transports en commun, Choix de localisation des ménages et des entreprises.

The Impacts of Urban Public Transportation: Evidence from the Paris Region

Abstract

Evaluating the impact of transport infrastructure meets a major challenge since rail lines are not randomly located. We use the natural experiment offered by the opening and progressive extension of the Regional Express Rail (RER) between 1970 and 2000 in the Paris metropolitan region, and in particular the deviation from original plans due to budgetary constraints and technical reasons, in order to identify the causal impact of urban rail transport on firm location, employment and population growth. We use a difference-in- differences approach on a specific subsample, selected to avoid endogeneity bias which occurs when evaluating transportation effects. We find that the increase in employment is 12.8% higher in municipalities connected to the new network compared to the existing suburban rail network. Places located within 20 km from Paris are the only affected. While we find no effect on overall population growth, our results suggest that the commissioning of the RER may have increased the competition for land since high-skilled households are more likely to locate in the vicinity of a RER station. Keywords : Public policy evaluation, Public transportation, Firm and household location choices.

Classification JEL : D04, H43, R42 Introduction

Urban public transit is considered as a key policy to ease urban congestion and promote environmentally-friendly transportation. In Europe as in the United States, multiple projects demonstrate the belief of policy makers in the efficiency of public spending for transportation. Mention may be made of the “Crossrail”1 project in London, the “Grand Paris Express”2 in France or the plan for high speed rail in California3. Besides, spending for inland transport infrastructure is significant: 0.7 percent of GDP in North America and 0.8 in Western Europe and even 0.9 in France (OECD, 2011). Given this great amount of public money spent into transport infrastructure, empirical evaluations are needed to assess the return of such costly investments. To that aim, this paper offers evidence on the way urban rail transit can shape urban development, using the natural experiment offered by the improvement of the Paris commuter rail system from the 1970s to the 1990s. During this period, the Paris metropolitan region spread and the population rose from 9,248,931 in 1968 to 10,952,011 inhabitants in 1999 (INSEE, Census). This growth has been accompanied by the improvement of the commuter rail system and the commissioning of the so-called Regional Express Rail (RER thereafter). This policy mainly led to the improvement of the existing network but also consisted in the construction of new stations and lines. This fast and high-capacity enhanced network offers a interesting identification strat- egy to estimate the causal impact of public mass transit on firm, employment and popu- lation location across the . More concretely, we estimate the effect of a station opening or improvement at the municipality level.4 We implement this difference- in-difference design on a specific subsample specifically chosen to address the endogeneity bias. We find that the number of jobs grew by 12.8% in municipalities connected to the RER network on the 1975-1990 period, compared to the growth rate that would have prevailed in the absence of the improved infrastructure. We obtain similar results for firm location but find no significant impact on population growth. The literature gives support to the idea that transportation plays a key role in the economics of cities. There are both empirical and theoretical evidence that transport infrastructures influence the location of people and economic activities within cities, but also between cities which is not covered in our work. The standard monocentric city model predicts that a decrease in transportation costs should increase the share of the population who lives in the suburbs (Alonso, 1960). According to this model, it also causes a rise in the size of the city thanks to lower congestion costs. Empirical results support this theoretical prediction. Baum-Snow (2007) studies the effect of highways on the shape of US cities. He shows that roads explain one third of the population displacement from city centers to the outskirts. Similar results hold for Spain (Garc´ıa-L´opez et al., 2013). Duranton and Turner (2012) highlight the positive impact of highways on city growth: a 10% increase in the stock of highway causing a 1.5% rise in local employment in the US. However, in line with theoretical models in economic geography, Faber (2014) confirms

1http://www.crossrail.co.uk/ 2http://www.societedugrandparis.fr/english-version 3http://www.hsr.ca.gov/ 4We will use the terms municipality and city interchangeably to design the administrative unit which is our unit of observation (more than 1300 of them in the Paris region).

3 that transportation could decrease economic activity in some cases. Indeed, he finds that highways caused a reduction in GDP growth of peripheral counties in China. Empirical studies on firm location choices also highlight a positive link with transport infrastructures. Coughlin and Segev (2000) show that highways foster foreign-owned manufacturing plant location in US counties. Holl (2004a,b) finds similar results for Portuguese and Spanish firms. Strauss-Kahn and Vives (2009) show that the proximity to an airport is a significant factor for headquarter relocation in the United States. More generally, transport infrastructure is positively associated with the productivity of cities. According to Fernald (1999), highway construction in the US increased the productivity of vehicle-intensive industries at a metropolitan scale. The contribution of our work is to provide results for firms, employment and population, in order to assess the differential impact of transportation depending on the type of economic agent. While the effects of highways on cities have been widely studied, public transportation has been subject to less evaluation. Some papers highlight the fact that mass transit has a specific effect on cities, compared to other means of transportation. First, commuter rail systems help reduce air pollution in cities. Chen and Whalley (2012) show that the opening of the metro of reduced measured concentration in carbon monoxide by 5 to 15 percent. Second, rail influences the location of people and jobs in cities, in a different way from other means of transportation. According to Baum-Snow and Kahn (2000), commuter rail investments caused a slight increase in the local value of properties in 5 majors American cities. It also encourages switching from driving to public transportation. Besides, Burchfield et al. (2006) show that cities built around early public transportation are less sprawled than cities built for cars, because of higher commuting costs. Glaeser et al. (2008) emphasize a ubiquitous effect of public transportation on the poor. On the one hand, the mobility of the poor is higher in American cities with a high level of public transportation service because car-based mobility is expensive. On the other hand, such cities are more segmented. In fact, low income people are stuck close to rail stations while rich people live in neighborhoods only accessible by car. Our results will emphasize once again that European and American cities work dif- ferently (Brueckner et al., 1999). In the Parisian case, we find suggestive evidence of a gentrification effect of commuter train in the inner ring of Paris suburbs. Finally, con- sidering the case of a major European city appears relevant as urban mass transit plays a bigger role in commuting than in Northern America. For example, only 5.3 percent of American workers use public transportation to commute5 (McKenzie and Rapino, 2011), while 13.3 percent of French workers do so (Fran¸cois, 2010) and even 22.6 percent of Japanese commuters6 (Japan Census, 2010). Besides, car is prevalent in the US (90.0%), less prominent in France (72.3%) and even rarer in Japan (46.9%). Because transportation infrastructures are not randomly located, evaluating their impact faces up to a severe endogeneity issue. The consequence is that a naive evalua- tion which would directly compare connected to unconnected areas could be biased. In addition, the intentions of policymakers may differ; they may intend to connect either dynamic or deprived areas depending on the public policy goal at the time of decision.

5Without people working at home. 6Workers and students over 15 years; public transportation includes company’s or school bus; two modes of transport can be given, in that case, users are shared between the two modes, on a half-half basis.

4 The consequence is that the sign of the endogeneity bias is unclear. The literature offers some examples of identification strategies to address this issue. Such strategies, based on natural experiments or clever instruments, yield the causal impact of new infrastructures. Duranton and Turner (2012) evaluate the impact of the highway network in the United States on the local evolution of employment. They use an instrumental variable strategy, based upon the 1947 plan of the interstate highway system, partially based on military purposes, and on the 1898 network of railroads, to address the endogeneity of the location of highways in 1980. Michaels (2008) also uses the 1947 plan as an exogenous source of variation of roads for evaluating the impact on interstate trade. Donaldson (2013) shows that railway extensions in India led to a decrease in interregional trade costs and increased both incomes and trade. To do so, he uses a natural experiment provided by 40,000 km of planned lines which were never built for arguably exogenous reasons. Banerjee et al. (2012) find a moderate positive effect of transportation access on income growth in China. They use the fact that railroad lines were built in China to connect European concessions on the coast and inland historical cities in the 19th century. They argue that crossed areas, which were located in between these two kinds of cities were “quasi-randomly” linked to the railway network and can be compared to similar unconnected areas. Our identification strategy combines the approaches of Donaldson (2013), Duranton and Turner (2012), Michaels (2008) and Banerjee et al. (2012). Concretely, the RER network has been implemented with the aim of connecting new economic subcenters located between 15 and 30 km away from the historical center of the city. Some existing commuter rail lines happens to cross existing stations which are located between the historical core and these subcenters. Such stations are therefore included in the RER enhancement program by accident rather than by design. These stations are consequently “quasi-randomly” treated and can be compared to similar untreated stations in order to estimate the causal impact of railway improvement. In addition, many plans have been presented in the 1960s to improve the Paris suburban train. They differ from each other, often because of technical reasons, pointing out some exogeneity in the selection of the rail line actually included in the RER network. Finally, data availability and precision is a key issue to accurately estimate the impact of transportation on location. Gibbons et al. (2012) insist on the fact that such an evaluation is more complicated in developed countries as transportation networks are already dense. In these conditions, it is necessary to measure not only if a given area is linked to a network but also the quality of rail service. To do so, we develop a method to recover the journey time by train across the Paris metropolitan region, at various points in time. We show that a one-minute decrease in the journey time to Paris increases the city’s employment by 2 percent. This paper is organized as follows. The first section relates the history of urban planning in the Paris region. The second section explains our estimation strategy. The third section details the econometric model we use and the fourth section presents the data used in estimation. The fifth section sets out the results.

5 1 Urban planning of the Paris region

The history of the suburban rail is quite intricate. It reflects the changing place of Paris in the national planning policies and the complicated relation between the city of Paris and its suburbs. First, there is a strong and long-lasting opposition between the city of Paris and the outskirts of the city. The border, marked by a protection wall in the 19th-century, replaced by a urban highway in the 1960s and the 1970s (Boulevard P´eriph´erique), is still present in the minds.7 The city of Paris has been strongly renovated by Baron Haussmann8 in the 19th century and is still very much organized according to the overall scheme defined and followed then. Conversely, the development and organization of the suburbs have been quite uncon- trolled, which did not prevent the population from growing rapidly while it stabilized and eventually declined in the city center (see Table 1). The first proposals to guide and organize urban growth were presented in the 1930s9 but were only partially put in place. The post-WWII decade is marked by the attempt to “contain” the Paris Region growth (Cottour, 2008), especially strong in an urban plan issued in 1960, called the PADOG10. This plan intended to limit urban development to the already built-up areas of the region. This central part should be reorganised and equipped, partly thanks to transportation infrastructures, while the rest of the region should remain unbuilt. At that time, the capital city was regarded as crowded, overdeveloped and its size and growth were seen as detrimental to the balanced development of the country. This sentiment was best summarized by the expression Paris and the French desert which refers to a French book by the geographer Jean-Fran¸coisGravier, that was very influential in the (central) authorities in charge of regional development in France.

Table 1: Population decentralization in the Paris region Paris Suburbs 1901 2,714,068 2,021,731 1946 2,725,374 3,872,556 1975 2,299,830 7,578,735 2006 2,181,371 9,351,027 Note: suburbs designate the Ile-de-Franceˆ region without Paris Sources: Census (Insee)

The coming to power of President De Gaulle is a turning point in the planning policy for Paris. Given that preceding attempts to limit urban growth had proven quite ineffi- cient, the Government decided to organize the scattered and under-equipped suburbs11. Urban policy for Paris changed from malthusianism to an open support to economic and demographic development. Following this idea, a new urban plan, the SDAURP12

7Even today, the city of Paris is significantly denoted by the term intra muros. 8Prefect of the Seine Department between 1853 and 1870, which included Paris in until 1967. 9The Plan Prost in 1932 for example. 10Plan d’Am´enagementet D’Organisation G´en´erale de la R´egionParisienne. 11During a helicopter tour over the metropolitan area, President De Gaulle would even have ordered Paul Delouvrier, General delegate for the Paris region, to “Put this mess in order !” 12Sch´emadirecteur d’am´enagementet d’urbanisme de la R´egionParisienne.

6 Figure 1: Economic subcenters of the Paris metropolitan region (new towns, airports and business district)

Cergy− N Roissy

PARIS

Marne−la−Vallée St.−Quentin−en−Y.

Orly

New town Airport Evry La Défense Inner Paris 0 10 km RER (1990) −Sénart

was presented in 1965 and included the redistribution of administrative boundaries, the construction of new infrastructures, the decentralization of job and population in “new towns”. New towns designate planned sub-cities located between 15 and 35 km away from the center of Paris in relatively underdeveloped areas. They were supposed to re- ceive between 500,000 and 1,000,000 inhabitants and thus disperse the population over the Paris region, in order to reduce urban congestion. This SDAURP plan especially envi- sioned an ambitious commuter rail system, the so-called Regional Express Rail. The RER was supposed to upgrade the suburban train network by the construction of hundreds of kilometers of new lines crossing the historical core of Paris towards the new subcenters of the Paris metropolitan area: the new towns (-la-Vall´ee, -Pontoise, Saint- Quentin-en-Yvelines, Melun-S´enart and Evry´ ) the two airports ( and Roissy) and the business district of La D´efense (see figure 1 and 2). This ambitious project has been implemented in the two subsequent decades but in a more modest way that initially planned, due to a worsened economic situation and a political change in 1969. In the end, the RER project principally consisted in upgrading existing lines, connected together by tunnels under the historical city core of Paris. It also included the construction of new branch lines towards airports and “new towns” not connected by an existing line, the commissioning of new trains and higher frequencies (see figure 3). Concretely, only 71 of the 433 RER stations are fully new; 98 km of railways were built and 22 km were reopened out of a 600 km network. However, the five line network, progressively opened between 1969 and 2004, reaches the goals assigned by the 1965 plan to connect the new subcenters to the historical center of Paris.

7 Figure 2: RER projets in 1960 (PADOG plan) and 1965 (SDAURP plan)

Cergy−Pontoise 1960 N Cergy−Pontoise 1965 N Roissy Roissy

PARIS PARIS

Marne−la−Vallée Marne−la−Vallée St.−Quentin−en−Y. St.−Quentin−en−Y.

Orly Orly

New RER line Evry Evry Upgraded RER line Other line 0 10 km 0 10 km Inner Paris Melun−Sénart Melun−Sénart

Figure 3: RER network in 1990 and 2010

Cergy−Pontoise 1990 N Cergy−Pontoise 2010 N Roissy Roissy

PARIS PARIS

Marne−la−Vallée Marne−la−Vallée St.−Quentin−en−Y. St.−Quentin−en−Y.

Orly Orly

New RER line Evry Evry Upgraded RER line Other line 0 10 km 0 10 km Inner Paris Melun−Sénart Melun−Sénart

8 Despite only few new track segments, the RER led to a significant improvement of the commuter rail network and made commuting much easier (see figure 6 in the appendix for an example). According to our simulations, the mean travel time to Paris13 was 49.9 minutes in 1969. Between 1969 and 2009 it decreased by 5.8 minutes for the municipal- ities connected to the RER while it decreased only by 1.3 minutes in the municipalities left apart from the new network. Thus, the RER offered about a 10 percent drop in commuting time for connected municipalities. This improvement may seem limited but the average effect hides a wide variety of situations. First, the journey time may only change for some neighborhoods. Second, some lines did not much improve the travel time because they almost exclusively used existing rail tracks.

2 Identification strategy

The issue of this study is to find an appropriate identification strategy that can address the endogeneity issue. A significant problem of transportation system evaluation is that new infrastructures are obviously not randomly located. To address the issue, we propose a method that uses only a subsample of municipalities within which the treatment can be considered as exogenous. As new lines and new stations were actually rare, our empirical strategy focuses on existing stations. We build a control group containing some suburban train stations that were not connected to the RER in 1990 and we compare it to some stations that already existed in 1960 and that have been upgraded to RER stations later. This section describes precisely which stations we select to obtain an exogenous treatment, using four arguments: first, intermediate stations that are located in between Paris city center and new economic subcenters were upgraded “by accident”; second, after a long period of under-investment the RER suddenly improved Paris suburban rail system in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s; third, the initial plans and the actual RER network differ, which suggests there is no clear intention to treat in our regression sample; finally, RER lines were often selected for technical reasons.

2.1 Comparison of intermediate cities The first point of the identification strategy focuses on intermediate cities. As stated above, the RER network has been implemented with the aim of connecting airports and new towns to the historical center of Paris. Consequently, RER lines happen to cross municipalities located in-between. We argue these municipalities have been connected to the RER network without intention to treat, which is similar to the identification strategy of Banerjee et al. (2012). In addition, the RER project mainly consisted in the enhancement of the existing commuter train network. This means that the intermediate stations have mostly been built in the 19th century, thus leaving no possibility of RER route manipulation. Besides, urban planning policies were highly centralized until the

13Travel time to Paris is the mean of the 20 minimum travel times to the 20 boroughs of Paris. In addition, we only consider the municipalities between 5 and 35 km from Paris which are the most likely to benefit from the RER, excluding the underground catchment area.

9 Figure 4: Control and treatment groups

Cergy−Pontoise N Roissy

PARIS

Marne−la−Vallée St.−Quentin−en−Y.

Orly

Treated Evry Control Inner Paris 0 10 km RER (1990) Melun−Sénart

1982 decentralization law, which limited the influence of local authorities on the RER project definition. In our regressions, we only consider municipalities with at least one commuter rail station in 1960. We first exclude termini areas from both control and treatment groups as they have been explicitly targeted by the RER policy. By termini areas, we mean the historic city of Paris and municipalities which are part of a new town, host an airport or the business district of “La D´efense” (see figure 4). Treatment is clearly not exogenous in these cases. In addition, it is impossible to find a proper counterfactual for these municipalities. In fact, there is no new town, airport, historic city center or business district which have not been connected to the RER in the Paris metropolitan region. Municipalities connected to the underground network are also removed because it is not possible to use our identification strategy for them, that is to say a strategy based on intermediate municipalities. After that first step, our subsample contains municipalities with at least one suburban train station in 1960 which belong neither to the historical city center nor to a new economic subcenter. Among these stations, some were upgraded and connected to the RER network because they were located on the path between the historical city center and new economic centers or because of technical reasons, which is confirmed by numerous project changes. We logically use this first type of stations as a treatment group. On the opposite, other municipalities, which were still served by commuter train but not by the RER, are used as a control group. Finally, we only include the inner ring of Paris suburbs (ie municipalities located within 20 km from Paris) in our sample because outer ring municipalities were often rural in the 1960s. Table 9 in the appendix shows that there is no significant difference in the employment growth of

10 control and treatment groups before the RER implementation, providing support for the exogeneity of the treatment. Furthermore, we argue that the location of the new economic centers in the Paris metropolitan region is exogenous. Indeed, the initial 1965 project mentioned the con- struction of eight new towns while only five have been actually built. More over, experts of that process (Alduy, 1983) insist on the fact that they were located in mostly rural areas and not in already developed places. The has been established on a WWI military base. The Roissy airport has been located in a large agricultural land plot. Consequently, it is very unlikely that the location of these subcenters (ie airports and new towns) have been determined to facilitate the connection of intermediate cities to the RER.

2.2 Underinvestment in suburban rail until the 1970s After a long period of underinvestment in suburban rail. The introduction of the RER offers a rapid and unprecedented improvement of the Paris mass transit system. The French railways have been mostly built during the 19th century by private companies. Each company was in charge of connecting a specific part of France to Paris. This institutional context results in a highly centralized network: the majority of lines are directed towards Paris and circular tracks are scarcer than radial ones, especially in the Paris region. In addition, networks of different companies were hardly connected and each of them ended in a different terminal station in Paris (see figure 5), even after merging the private companies in a unique public company in 1938. Consequently, it was not possible to go across Paris by train. A very dense and efficient subway system was built between 1900 and WWII, but it only served the city center. Contrary to certain initial projects14, the subway was not connected to the existing railway lines serving the suburbs, because the Paris city council pushed for this solution against these connections in order to limit urban sprawl (Gerondeau, 2003). Consequently, commuting from one suburb to an other required a train change and a metro connection (see figure 6 in the appendix for an example). These initial decisions deprived the Paris region from an efficient suburban train system until the 1970s. However, rail seems to have played a big role in population de- centralization in the second part of the 19th century and first part of the 20th century. Table 6 in the appendix shows an important correlation between the 20th century subur- ban train network and the population growth in the inner ring of the Paris region. The deficient mass transit system raised many proposals in the 1920s and the 1930s aiming at connecting isolated lines by building railway tunnels through the city of Paris and the suburbs (Larroque et al., 2002). If the first extensions of the subway to the suburbs were actually built in the 1930s, almost nothing was done at this period for the suburban rail system.15 After WWII, which logically stopped rail projects, a new suburban train system for Paris was regularly mentioned, without being actually started. The principle that investments should be redirected from the overdeveloped capital city towards the rest of the country probably hampered such plans. After a long period of inaction, several plans for new transport system have been proposed in the 1960s. These projects resulted

14For example, the Haag project in 1887. 15Except for the electrification of the Sceaux line in the south part of the Paris region.

11 Figure 5: Paris suburban train network in 1960

Cergy−Pontoise N Roissy

PARIS

Marne−la−Vallée St.−Quentin−en−Y.

Orly Former private company Etat Nord Est Evry PLM P−O Midi Other company 0 10 km Inner Paris Melun−Sénart

Note: the map shows the passenger rail network in 1960. It also indicates the former private company which owned each line before the nationalization of the network in 1938. News towns and airports are reported on the map but did not exist at that time. in the RER construction from the the 1970s to the 1990s. This rapid enhancement of the Paris suburban rail system offers a good opportunity to evaluate the impact of transport infrastructure at a metropolitan scale.

2.3 Differences between plans and realisations: political and budgetary reasons The first substantial plan for suburban mass transit is included in the PADOG plan issued in 1960 (see figure 2). It summarises the previous projects and proposes the digging of several tunnels through Paris in order to connect isolated suburban railway lines. The plan is rapidly followed by the civil work start for the East-West line in 1961. However, the PADOG clearly intended to contain the urban development of the Paris region within already built-up areas in order to stop the population growth. However, this central part should be reorganised and equipped, partly thanks to rail and road infrastructures, to response the saturation of the Paris region. This malthusian plan was logically not in line with the ambitions of President De Gaulle for the Paris region, we mentioned before. The SDAURP plan of 1965 consequently envisioned a much more ambitious commuter rail system, the so-called Regional Express Rail (see figure 2). The RER was supposed to upgrade the suburban train network by the construction of hundreds of kilometers

12 of new lines crossing the historical core of Paris towards the major subcenters of the Paris metropolitan area (the new towns, the two airports and the business district of La D´efense). The implementation of the RER has been more modest than projected in the 1965 plan and closer to the 1960 one. Zembri (2006) shows that the election of President Pompidou after the resignation of President De Gaulle in 1969 played a major role in the way the RER was implemented. The cost of the projected new lines was the first reason to review the initial project. The new administration considered it was possible to achieve similar goals by partially using the existing network. Consequently, the SDAURP has been deeply modified and the construction of new lines has been far rarer than envisioned in 1965. We noticed substantial difference between the 1960 PADOG plan, the 1965 SDAURP plan and the built network (see figures 2 and 3). Consequently, there is hardly any line which would not be included in at least a RER project or in the current RER network. In other words, almost all municipalities of our subsample could have been treated. The differences between the PADOG plan and the built network are due to the construction of the five “new towns”. The differences between the 1965 SDAURP plan and the built network are due to the 1969 political change. Such changes in the RER program suggest that long-term economic anticipations did not play a central role in the choice of RER routes except for new subcenters. It would be surprising that development perspectives change so rapidly when considering the construction of a transport infrastructure designed to last more than one century. On the contrary, they are more consistent with non- economic factors: political change and shifts in urban policies.

2.4 Differences between plans and realisations: technical rea- sons Looking at figure 3, we notice that some RER lines were not built towards the new economic subcenters we mentioned before. Related to that point, Collardey (1999) details many technical reasons which explain the selection of RER lines amongst suburban rail lines. First, some lines were totally out of date and needed a major improvement16. Second, three stations in Paris required an underground extension, and were logically connected to the RER in order to relieve traffic congestion.17 Third, Gerondeau (2003) interestingly describes the difficult relationships between the two public companies in charge of Paris suburban train network, RATP and SNCF. RATP, the subway company, envisioned the RER project as a regional subway which would be independent of the SNCF suburban network. The first two lines and the SDAURP plan of 1965 have been planned according to this idea and consequently required the SNCF to sell local lines, without any main-line traffic, or to build brand new lines. Indeed, the only lines which are mentioned in both the 1960 and 1965 plans, and which have been actually connected to

16For example, the line which serves the south east part of region, was still served by steam- engine trains in 1969. A previous improvement plan had been postponed by WWII, which explains why this line was prioritized in the RER project. 17In Austerlitz station, suburban train interfered with main-line traffic when crossing the station, St- Lazare station was the first station in terms of suburban traffic, free surface railway tracks were needed in Lyon station for high speed rail.

13 the 1990 RER network, are three local lines.18 The 1969 political change led to a shift in the project. RER had then to be an interconnected network, meaning that trains should be able to run on both RATP and SNCF tracks and connect stations belonging to both networks. This institutional context is important for us, because it enables certain railway lines to be upgraded, which was not possible during the first phase of the program. All in all, technical reasons are logically independent of economic growth and thus strengthen our exogeneity hypothesis.

3 Econometric method

In this section, in accordance with our identification strategy presented in the previous section, we present the estimator used to measure the effect of the RER on firm location, employment and population. We aim to estimate the causal effect of a RER station opening in a municipality on employment, population and firm location. In this section, we describe a very simple difference-in-difference method to compute this causal estimate by comparing treatment and control groups. Our baseline estimates cover the 1975 to 1990 period. Considering the fact that the RER network progressively spread over the Paris metropolitan region, the treatment group enlarges over time while the control group becomes smaller (see figure 4). Consequently, there are too few municipalities in the control group in the inner ring after 1990 and it is impossible to use our identification strategy after that date. As major network improvements were put into service in the 1970s and the 1980s, this time restriction should not prevent the estimation of a treatment effect.

∆ ln Yi,75→90 = δRERi,75→90 + βXi,1975 + i (1) The dependent variable is the growth rate in population, employment or count of firms (Y ) in municipality i between 1975 and 1990, ∆ ln Yi,75→90 = ln Yi,1990 − ln Yi,1975. We regress this variable on the treatment which equals one only if the municipality is connected to the RER network between 1975 and 199019. We also add initial socio- demographic and geographic controls Xi: initial density of the considered variable, dis- tance to Paris, geographic dummies (North, South, East or West of Paris), and measures of alternative transportation infrastructure (highways, and commuter train for some spec- ifications). Finally, we exclude forests and water areas to calculate the area of the munic- ipalities, considering this type of area is very unlikely to be urbanized. We also exclude the rare municipalities with changing boundaries. Table 3 shows some discrepancies between control and treatment groups. Note that these discrepancies are larger at more than 20 km from Paris, while they are quite limited closer. Such differences are due to small rural municipalities of the outer ring, which are unlikely to be treated. Consequently, we only consider municipalities located within 20 km, avoiding this possible selection bias in the urbanized inner ring. Control and treatment groups always refer to such municipalities in the rest of the article. Finally, treatment summary statistics are difficult to interpret. Between 1968 and 1975, the job growth rate is higher for untreated municipalities compared to treated ones. It is due to

18The Vincennes line, the Sceaux line and the Saint-Germain-en-Laye line 19Alternative time spells and variables are tested as robustness tests, see part 5.3.

14 Table 2: Comparison of control and treatment groups: mean values and standard devia- tions

< 20 km from Paris > 20 km from Paris Untreated Treated Untreated Treated Pop. density in 1975 (people per sq. km) 4686 6370 1237 2119 (3500) (2703) (1377) (1244) Empl. density in 1975 (worker per sq. km) 1382 1881 280 640 (1468) (1405) (405) (677) Firm density in 1975 (firm per sq. km) 151 180 27 53 (155) (104) (27) (42) Travel time to Paris in 1975 (minutes) 46 42 58 54 (7) (5) (9) (7) Distance to Paris (km) 14.6 13.3 28 25.3 (3.6) (3.3) (4.3) (4.2) Surface (sq. km) 4.7 6 5.5 6.6 (2.5) (4.2) (3.1) (3) Job growth rate 1968-75 (in pct) 0.15 0.111 0.29 0.457 (0.42) (0.265) (0.672) (0.446) Job growth rate 1975-90 (in pct) 0.259 0.184 0.446 0.298 (0.589) (0.368) (0.639) (0.406) Number of municipality 50 51 57 23 Sources: Census 1975, Sirene 1975 (Insee). Note: treatment status in 1990. Standard deviations in parenthesis.

the fact that control group municipalities are smaller and grew more rapidly because of a catch-up phenomenon. However, in the subsequent period, job growth rate is similar in both groups which can be due to the effect of the treatment. We investigate further on those differences in the appendix Table 7, where we regress dummy variable indicating the presence of a RER station on the characteristics of the city. It appears that a large portion of the differences between treatment and control can be attributed to physical geography: area, altitude and distance to Paris are the main determinants. RER lines were designed to connect the center of Paris to remote economic subcenters. Accordingly, the larger is the municipality and the closer to Paris is a city, the greater is the chance to be on the straight line between Paris and a subcenter and thus the larger is the probability to be treated. Since large and central cities are more populated, discrepancies between control and treatment group are not inconsistent with the exogeneity of treatment. In the most naive specifications, coefficients associated to the population density in 1975 are significant predictors of the number of RER stations in a municipality. However, those variables lose impact and statistical significance in the inner ring20 when introducing the area of the municipality, the distance to Paris and the maximum altitude, providing support to our strategy. In addition, we do not select municipalities within 5 km from Paris to ensure that both groups contain all types of municipalities and to exhibit a sample for which the common support condition holds

20The coefficient associated with the lowest population density, under 1 000 inhabitants per squared kilometer, is still significant; only 6 municipalities on 101 are in this situation. It indicates that the less populated municipalities, in the rural fringes of the metropolitan area, have been neglected in the implementation choice of the RER.

15 (see figure ). Finally, an important caveat should be added regarding interpretation of the results. There may actually be two effects of RER station openings: attractiveness and dis- placement. If employment rises due to increased attractiveness, untreated municipalities should not be affected. In that case, the RER network increases employment or the total count of firms in the whole region. On the contrary, if employment increases in a treated municipality because of a displacement effect, it necessarily implies a decrease for other municipalities, and even potentially municipalities belonging to the control group. Ob- viously, the reality is most likely in between. To discriminate between the two effects in the case of firm location, Schmidheiny and Br¨ulhart(2011) suggest the use of a nested logit model in order to separate the respective share of relocation and attractiveness. The estimation of such a model requires considering outside options for individual firms (for example, the rest of France and other European countries). We leave this more ambitious exercise to future research and note that focusing on effects inside the Paris area makes it challenging to isolate the two effects rigorously.

4 Data

We use data at the municipality level from different sources to provide information on firm counts, employment and population. We also build a new dataset to precisely de- scribe the evolution of the urban transportation system between the 1970s and the 2000s. Municipality is the most accurate geographical scale available since more precise data are computed only from the 1990s. However, French municipalities are particularly small in comparison with other European countries. The Paris metropolitan region contains 1300 municipalities which is an adequate geographical scale for this type of estimation. Finally, there are 101 municipalities in the regression sample (see figure 3). Concerning firms, we use the French administrative business register “Sirene” be- tween 1974 and 2004. It provides exhaustive information on the industry, the location at a municipality level, the opening and closing years. We aggregate firm counts at the municipality level, year by year. We also use information on foreign investment over the period under study. Until the 1990s, foreigner investors had to register every invest- ment in France at the French Treasury. A dataset of foreign direct investment (FDI) has been computed using this administrative requirement. So, we have data on shareholding including the nationality of the shareholder and the proportion of capital held by foreign- ers. As this compulsory registration has been phased out in the 1990s, reliable data on FDI are available only until 1994. Finally, we use census data to assess population level, employment and the social composition of municipalities at each census year (e.g. 1968, 1975, 1982, 1990 and 1999). Our first treatment variable is the most simple one: the presence of a RER station in the municipality. However, this basic variable may not fully account for the better train service due to the RER: higher frequency, new trains, new lines. To test the robustness of our approach, we also use alternative variables: the number of RER stations in the municipality, the share of the municipality within 1 km from a station and the travel time decrease. These variables are more precise and can thus give a better information on the improvement of transport service quality. However, all this variables are aggregated at

16 the municipality scale, while they only affect economic agents located in the vicinity of a station. Consequently, the results are more difficult to inter interpret because we do not know exactly who benefit from such improvements. Indeed, in a given municipality, there are both treated (ie in the catchment area of a RER station) and untreated (in other parts of the municipality) economic agents. In other words, a higher number of RER stations or a greater reduction of travel time do not necessarily imply a transport service improvement of the same magnitude, at the municipality scale. Besides natural measure of the improved quality of the network would be the increased frequency of trains, which played a big role in the improvement of the Paris commuter train system. Unfortunately, it seems impossible to find such data over a long period of time. To measure the evolution of the journey time, we use the reduction of travel time. To build this variable, we make the important assumption that RER did not increase the speed of trains. This assumption is likely to hold as a big part of the electrification of the commuter train network was completed several years before. Consequently, the measured variation of the journey will be due to the connection of isolated lines. Concretely, we consider the commuter train and metro networks as one graph. The train and metro stations are the nodes of this graph. In the same way, the lines which link the stations are considered as the edges of this graph. We apply a simple shortest path algorithm to calculate the journey time between two stations of the transportation system. To compute this journey duration for a given year, we remove edges corresponding to lines opened after this date. We thus obtain a matrix of travel duration between every station of the transportation system, year by year, from 1969 to 2009. We aggregate the matrix in a single variable which is the mean of the travel time to the 20 districts of the city of Paris. This variable, hereafter, the mean travel time to Paris, is a good summary of the transportation system as the network is highly centralized towards Paris. We consider the travel time to all districts of Paris. Indeed, the RER consisted, inside Paris, in the digging of four tunnels to connect isolated lines. The travel time to the closest districts may thus not have decreased while a new tunnel may allow a better connection, and thus a lower travel time, to more districts neighborhoods. To take into account the rapid development of road transportation in the Paris metropolitan region, we also control for the access to the highway network. Indeed, highway construction is not generally and uniformly distributed among Paris metropoli- tan region. Car-based accessibility is improved in some municipalities while it is stable in other. We do not want highway construction to bias RER effect estimation. More precisely, for a given municipality, we create a dummy which equals one if the nearest highway is less than 1 km away.

5 Results

5.1 The RER effect on employment Table 3 provides our benchmark results on employment growth. The first column presents the most naive way to estimate the parameter of interest: all municipalities are included except for the most central part of the Paris region, very urbanized and connected to the dense subway system. We also control for some basic characteristics of the municipalities. A dominant feature of the city-level growth in the Paris area seems to be the catching up,

17 since the effect of initial job density declines steadily with the level of density. A second salient and probably related result is the strong influence of highways on employment growth. This suggests that this growth of initially low density cities was helped by the strong rises in car equipement and motorway density in this period. However, this phenomenon is unlikely to bias the estimation of RER effect: RER station location and highway location appears unrelated (see table 7 in the appendix). The effects of RER and suburban train is statistically significant in this naive specifi- cation, but the order of magnitude of the RER variable decreases in the following columns, compared to this rough estimation. This is the case when we restrain the control group to cities which already had a train station at the beginning of the period. When comparing RER stations only to other suburban train stations in column (2), we obtain a positive and significant impact of 9.1%. Besides, this column shows that the economic subcen- ters of the Paris metropolitan region (e.g. new towns, business districts and airports) grew extremely rapidly between 1975 and 1990. Excluding these subcenters in column (3) slightly decreases the coefficient associated to the treatment at around 6.3% which becomes not significants. It may indicate that employment growth is higher in munici- palities which were explicitly targeted by the RER program, suggesting that ignoring the endogeneity issue leads to overestimate the treatment impact. But the impact becomes significant again when our preferred identification strategy, reported in column (4), is used, the growth of employment between 1975 and 1990 is 12.8% higher in municipalities connected to the RER, compared with the growth rate that would have prevailed in the absence of new infrastructures. Note that we find no significant effect further away from Paris, where there were only 23 municipalities with a RER station in 1990.

5.2 Different tastes for accessibility We now turn to the effect of RER on employment broken down by sector and on firm counts. Table 4 indicates that the positive effect of the Regional Express Rail is also valid for firm location choices. We note that the estimated impact on the number of firms is very similar to the one obtained for employment. Looking at the effects on foreign-owned firms, striking differences arise. First, initial density does not seem to exhibit the same catch up effect as in column (1). Second, the RER treatment effect is much larger in magnitude, but less significant, for this set of firms and reaches 32%, suggesting that mass transit affects foreign firms more intensely than local ones. It is also to be noted that highways also have a much stronger impact. Therefore, transport infrastructure, and access to the city center seem dominant determinants for foreign investors. The last three columns show the effect of the RER on the industry specialization of the city, broken down between construction, manufacturing and services. The point estimate is similar across industries. Under such conditions, we can not conclude that RER caused a shift in industry composition in treated municipalities. Table 5 reports results for the overall population growth. While we find in general no significant effect on the population growth, we find suggestive evidence of a gentrification effect. We do not observe either income or housing prices at the city level in the 1970s and the 1980s. Given this data limitation, we use instead the skill level of the popu- lation, which can be considered as an acceptable first approximation. We break down the population into three categories: low-skilled (junior high school and lower), middle-

18 Table 3: Effect of RER on employment at the municipality level

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Dependant variable: ∆ ln employment1975−90 Sample restriction: Train station in 1975 XXXX No economic subcenters XXX Distance to Paris 5-35 km 5-35 km 5-35 km 5-20 km 20-35 km Intercept 0.216∗ 0.404∗∗∗ 0.42∗∗∗ 0.378∗∗∗ 0.345∗ (0.115) (0.104) (0.1) (0.103) (0.191) ∗∗ ∗∗ ∗∗∗ RER1990 0.199 0.091 0.063 0.128 −0.021 (0.087) (0.046) (0.042) (0.044) (0.09) ∗ Train station 1990 0.086 (0.049) ∗∗∗ ∗ Highway1990 0.166 0.056 0.087 0.082 0.023 (0.056) (0.051) (0.052) (0.052) (0.099) 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.029 0.096 0.057 0.055 (0.08) (0.064) (0.07) (0.075) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref. ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.083 0.021 0.007 0.02 (0.057) (0.058) (0.055) (0.053) ∗ ∗ 20km ≤ dP aris < 25km 0.16 −0.081 −0.143 0.017 (0.097) (0.081) (0.077) (0.111) 25km ≤ dP aris < 30km −0.04 −0.109 −0.126 ref. (0.095) (0.102) (0.092) ∗ 30km ≤ dP aris ≤ 35km −0.196 −0.214 −0.108 −0.068 (0.104) (0.139) (0.134) (0.15) Job density1975 < 200 0.131 0.008 −0.039 −0.288 0.046 (0.086) (0.102) (0.105) (0.267) (0.124) Job density1975 [200, 500] ref. ref. ref. ref. ref. ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗ Job density1975 [500, 1000] −0.317 −0.326 −0.325 −0.389 −0.317 (0.067) (0.072) (0.071) (0.099) (0.135) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 [1000, 2500] −0.472 −0.481 −0.479 −0.514 −0.443 (0.082) (0.08) (0.079) (0.114) (0.108) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 > 2500 −0.562 −0.654 −0.651 −0.632 −0.662 (0.123) (0.094) (0.092) (0.119) (0.121) Maximum altitude −0.0008 −0.0003 −0.0002 0.0006 −0.001 (0.0006) (0.0006) (0.0005) (0.0005) (0.001) South 0.184∗∗∗ 0.068 0.075 −0.042 0.218 (0.069) (0.07) (0.066) (0.059) (0.147) West 0.191∗∗ 0.073 0.024 −0.026 0.089 (0.079) (0.078) (0.073) (0.076) (0.149) North ref. ref. ref. ref. ref. East 0.306∗∗∗ 0.146 0.081 0.009 0.22 (0.077) (0.09) (0.083) (0.066) (0.175) New town 0.523∗∗∗ (0.147) Airport 0.067 (0.069) La Defense 0.471∗∗∗ (0.123) Number of observations 483 209 181 101 80 R2 0.176 0.35 0.27 0.447 0.18 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%.

19 Table 4: Effect of RER on firms and employment by industry

Dependant variable: ∆ ln firm75−90 ∆ ln employment75−90 Sample: All firms Foreign Manufac- Construc- Services firms turing tion Intercept −0.023 0.115 2∗∗∗ 2.612∗∗∗ 1.013∗∗∗ (0.073) (0.318) (0.346) (0.725) (0.375) ∗∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗∗∗ RER1990 0.102 0.315 0.138 0.14 0.124 (0.035) (0.161) (0.072) (0.084) (0.046) ∗ ∗ ∗∗ Highway1990 0.073 0.287 0.241 0.083 0.055 (0.04) (0.161) (0.107) (0.082) (0.051) ∗∗ ∗∗ ∗ 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.01 −0.196 0.321 0.271 0.136 (0.042) (0.214) (0.144) (0.125) (0.075) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref. ref. ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.037 0.038 −0.066 −0.071 0.06 (0.053) (0.193) (0.128) (0.115) (0.053) Maximum altitude −0.0002 0.001 0.0008 −0.0008 0.0004 (0.0005) (0.002) (0.0009) (0.001) (0.0006) South −0.02 0.175 −0.22∗ −0.138 −0.061 (0.045) (0.171) (0.129) (0.111) (0.065) West 0.108∗ 0.147 −0.05 −0.095 −0.06 (0.057) (0.217) (0.157) (0.136) (0.075) North ref. ref. ref. ref. ref. East −0.011 0.185 −0.073 0.034 0.042 (0.047) (0.241) (0.114) (0.118) (0.072) ∗∗∗ Firm density1975 < 50 0.532 1.035 (0.133) (0.659) ∗∗∗ Firm density1975 [50, 100] 0.439 0.155 (0.098) (0.402) ∗∗∗ Firm density1975 [100, 200] 0.221 0.334 (0.078) (0.313) Firm density1975 [200, 500] 0.104 0.082 (0.07) (0.248) Firm density1975 >500 ref. ref. ∗ Job density1975 < 200 −0.081 −0.96 −0.412 (0.259) (0.54) (0.263) Job density1975 [200, 500] ref. ref. ref. ∗ ∗ Job density1975 [500, 1000] −0.421 −0.121 −0.196 (0.231) (0.161) (0.114) ∗ Job density1975 [1000, 2500] −0.182 0.066 −0.277 (0.285) (0.217) (0.149) Job density1975 > 2500 −0.12 0.275 −0.25 (0.289) (0.291) (0.184) ∗∗∗ log manufacturing1975 −0.395 (0.065) ∗∗∗ log building1975 −0.558 (0.16) log services1975 −0.101 (0.071) Number of observations 101 88 101 101 101 R2 0.532 0.266 0.538 0.431 0.361 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters and located between 5 and 20 kms away from Paris.

20 skilled (senior high school and vocational education) and high-skilled (college diploma and higher). We find a slight but significant impact of the RER only on the high-skill population. It could suggest that accessible areas became more attractive for households that are likely to pay more for their housing: only wealthy households could afford to stay or move in these areas or wealthy households have a higher taste for public transport- based accessibility. Given that the inner ring was already widely urbanized in the 1960s (see Table 3), especially in the vicinity of suburbain train stations (see Table 6), a global population growth would have required to densify treated municipalities. Contrary to this idea, previous studies on French housing market highlight a low supply elasticity on the housing market (Grislain-Letr´emy and Trevien, 2014), suggesting that the RER is unlikely to increase the total stock of housing in previously developed places.21 Con- sequently, our results suggest that the increased accessibility resulted in a population displacement effect: a shift toward more wealthy residents around new stations.

5.3 Robustness checks The central assumption of difference-in-differences is that the control group and the treatment group would have grown by the same amount in absence of the treatment. To test for the common trend assumption, we provide a placebo test. Concretely, we test our model on the 1968-1975 period to be sure there is no ex-ante trend gap between groups. The placebo test gives support to our identification strategy as we do not find any significant difference between the control and treatment group for both strategies before 1975 (see table 9 in the appendix). It also shows that the RER did not induce significant anticipation effects on firms. We would need data on an annual basis to ensure that there is no treatment effect in the immediate years before a station opening. However, we note once more that our identification strategy is more reliable in the inner ring than in the outer ring. Concretely, the effect of RER is close to be significant at more than 20 km from Paris on the 1968-1975 period, while the point estimate is very close to zero on the subsequent period. This could be due to the fact that small and rural municipalities have a higher volatility in the growth rate of employment. Table 10 presents the results of the model tested on alternative interest variables. The first two columns decompose the treatment effect between the 1975-1982 and 1982-1990 periods. We find a stronger impact in the second period, that can be due to a certain lag in job location, for example related to the time required for office building construction. However, the sum of the two coefficients is close to the effect we highlight fot the whole period. The third column indicates that the significant treatment impact still holds when considering the change in job density level instead of the log growth of jobs. Table 8 (in appendix) presents the estimation of the treatment effect using alternative treatment variables: the share of the municipality located within 1 km from a station, the number of stations in the municipality and the travel time decrease between 1975 and 1990. All variables yield significant results. Indeed, if the whole of a municipality is located within 1 km from a RER station, the employment growth is 23.4% larger. Besides, employment increases by 10.5% with an additional station and by 2% when journey time to Paris decreases by one minute. This implies that employment grows respectively by

21This question would need to be linked with regulation of land use and building height, but here again lack of data makes rigorous investigation difficult.

21 Table 5: Effect of RER on population by level of education

Dependant variable: ∆ ln population75−90 Sample: All ≤ Junior Senior high ≥ College high school school and voc. Intercept −0.017 −0.435 1.398∗∗∗ 1.947∗∗∗ (0.052) (0.473) (0.468) (0.297) ∗ RER1990 0.05 0.05 0.036 0.087 (0.031) (0.042) (0.039) (0.05) Highway1990 0.005 0.009 0.013 0.033 (0.025) (0.032) (0.039) (0.046) 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.009 −0.007 0.066 0.086 (0.029) (0.051) (0.049) (0.081) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref. ref. ∗∗∗ ∗∗ 15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.093 0.135 0.063 −0.013 (0.031) (0.051) (0.053) (0.059) ∗∗∗ Pop density1975 [1000, 2500] 0.17 0.169 0.043 −0.018 (0.065) (0.105) (0.107) (0.105) Pop density1975 [2500, 10000] ref. ref. ref. ref.

Pop density1975 > 10000 −0.016 −0.017 0.027 0.109 (0.029) (0.051) (0.069) (0.083) Maximum altitude 0.0005 0.0002 −0.0001 0.0005 (0.0003) (0.0004) (0.0005) (0.0006) South −0.146∗∗∗ −0.164∗∗∗ −0.172∗∗∗ −0.093 (0.041) (0.055) (0.056) (0.068) West −0.144∗∗∗ −0.296∗∗∗ −0.283∗∗∗ −0.049 (0.04) (0.055) (0.07) (0.072) North ref. ref. ref. ref. East −0.024 −0.017 −0.005 −0.014 (0.04) (0.056) (0.048) (0.059) log low-skilled1975 0.017 (0.061) ∗∗ log medium-skilled1975 −0.161 (0.068) ∗∗∗ log high-skilled1975 −0.248 (0.052) Number of observations 101 101 101 101 R2 0.514 0.512 0.465 0.467 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters and located between 5 and 20 kms away from Paris. The regressions on skill level are run on the labor force.

22 13.6%, 13.6% and 9% in treated municipality using each alternative treatment variables.22 These results are in line with our 12.8% baseline estimate and thus confirms the robustness of mass transit impact on employment.

22Note that there are averagely 1.31 RER stations per treated municipality, that 58% of treated municipality area is located within 1km from a RER station in average and that travel time is reduced by an additional 3 minutes in treated municipalities.

23 References

Jean-Paul Alduy. Quarante ans de planification en r´egiond’ˆIle-de-france. Cahiers de l’IAURIF, (70):10–91, 1983.

William Alonso. A theory of the urban land market. Papers in Regional Science, 6(1): 149–157, 1960.

Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo, and Nancy Qian. On the road: Access to transportation infrastructure and economic growth in china. NBER Working Papers 17897, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, 2012.

Nathaniel Baum-Snow. Did highways cause suburbanization? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(2):775–805, 2007.

Nathaniel Baum-Snow and Matthew E. Kahn. The effects of new public projects to expand urban rail transit. Journal of Public Economics, 77(2):241–263, August 2000.

Marianne Bertrand, Esther Duflo, and Sendhil Mullainathan. How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1):249– 275, 2004.

Jan K. Brueckner, Jacques-Francois Thisse, and Yves Zenou. Why is central Paris rich and downtown Detroit poor?: An amenity-based theory. European Economic Review, 43(1):91–107, 1999.

Marcy Burchfield, Henry G. Overman, Diego Puga, and Matthew A. Turner. Causes of sprawl: A portrait from space. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2):587–633, 2006.

Yihsu Chen and Alexander Whalley. Green infrastructure: The effects of urban rail transit on air quality. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 4(1):58–97, 2012.

Bernard Collardey. Les trains de banlieue, tome II de 1938 `a1999. Editions La Vie du Rail, 1999.

Claude Cottour. Une br`eve histoire de l’am´enagement de Paris et sa r´egion. Technical report, Direction r´egionalede l’´equipement d’ˆIle-de-France, 2008.

Cletus C. Coughlin and Eran Segev. Location determinants of new foreign-owned man- ufacturing plants. Journal of Regional Science, 40(2):323–351, 2000.

Dave Donaldson. Railroads of the raj: Estimating the impact of transportation infras- tructure. Technical report, 2013.

Gilles Duranton and Matthew A. Turner. Urban growth and transportation. The Review of Economic Studies, 2012.

Benjamin Faber. Trade integration, market size, and industrialization: Evidence from China’s national trunk highway system. The Review of Economic Studies, 2014.

24 John G. Fernald. Roads to prosperity? assessing the link between public capital and productivity. American Economic Review, 89(3):619–638, 1999.

Dominique Fran¸cois. Se rendre au travail : distances et temps de transport s’allongent. In La mobilit´e des Fran¸cais. Panorama issu de l’enquˆete nationale transports et d´eplacements 2008, volume 4, chapter 48, pages 83–98. 2010.

Miguel-Angel´ Garc´ıa-L´opez, Adelheid Holl, and Elisabet Viladecans-Marsal. Suburban- ization and highways: when the romans, the bourbons and the first cars still shape Spanish cities. Working Papers 2013/5, Institut d’Economia de Barcelona (IEB), 2013.

Christian Gerondeau. La saga du RER et le maillon manquant. Presses de l’ENPC, 2003.

Stephen Gibbons, Teemu Lyytik¨ainen,Henry Overman, and Rosa Sanchis-Guarner. New road infrastructure: the effects on firms. SERC Discussion Papers 0117, Spatial Eco- nomics Research Centre, LSE, 2012.

Edward L. Glaeser, Matthew E. Kahn, and Jordan Rappaport. Why do the poor live in cities the role of public transportation. Journal of Urban Economics, 63(1):1–24, January 2008.

C´elineGrislain-Letr´emy and Corentin Trevien. The impact of housing subsidies on the rental sector: the French example. INSEE Working Paper G2014/08, INSEE, 2014.

Adelheid Holl. Manufacturing location and impacts of road transport infrastructure: empirical evidence from spain. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(3):341–363, 2004a.

Adelheid Holl. Transport infrastructure, agglomeration economies, and firm birth: Em- pirical evidence from portugal. Journal of Regional Science, 44(4):693–712, 2004b.

Dominique Larroque, Michel Margairaz, and Pierre Zembri. Paris et ses transports XIXe- XXe si`ecles.Deux si`eclesde d´ecisionspour la ville et sa r´egion. Editions´ Recherches, 2002.

Brian McKenzie and Melanie Rapino. Commuting in the United States: 2009. Commu- nity survey reports, United States Census Bureau, 2011.

Guy Michaels. The effect of trade on the demand for skill: Evidence from the interstate highway system. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(4):683–701, 2008.

Kurt Schmidheiny and Marius Br¨ulhart.On the equivalence of location choice models: Conditional logit, nested logit and poisson. Journal of Urban Economics, 69(2):214– 222, 2011.

Vanessa Strauss-Kahn and Xavier Vives. Why and where do headquarters move? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39(2):168–186, 2009.

Pierre Zembri. La difficile modernisation des transports parisiens. In Pascal Griset, editor, Georges Pompidou et la modernit´e, pages 37–50. 2006.

25 A Appendix

A.1 Estimates

Table 6: Correlation between train and population since the 19th century

Dependant variable: log population density Year: 1846 1896 1946 1975 1990 Intercept 7.142∗∗∗ 8.57∗∗∗ 10.402∗∗∗ 10.748∗∗∗ 10.594∗∗∗ (0.554) (0.578) (0.468) (0.4) (0.393) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Train station 1975 0.203 0.515 0.681 0.52 0.477 (0.126) (0.142) (0.124) (0.109) (0.106) ∗ 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.25 0.527 −0.035 −0.261 −0.209 (0.272) (0.285) (0.211) (0.187) (0.191) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref. ref. ref. ∗∗∗ ∗ ∗ 15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.672 0.449 0.269 0.294 0.365 (0.222) (0.25) (0.226) (0.206) (0.198) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ dP aris −0.185 −0.216 −0.244 −0.21 −0.195 (0.044) (0.045) (0.039) (0.038) (0.038) Maximum altitude 0.002 −0.001 −0.004∗∗∗ −0.003∗∗ −0.002∗∗ (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) South −0.055 −0.138 0.163 0.351∗∗ 0.232 (0.166) (0.17) (0.159) (0.148) (0.149) West 0.424∗∗∗ 0.374∗∗ 0.304∗ 0.357∗∗ 0.285∗ (0.151) (0.165) (0.16) (0.156) (0.156) North ref. ref. ref. ref. ref. East −0.205 0.12 0.468∗∗∗ 0.563∗∗∗ 0.572∗∗∗ (0.17) (0.197) (0.154) (0.138) (0.14) Number of observations 178 187 193 193 193 R2 0.384 0.531 0.652 0.593 0.546 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. Sample: all cities located between 5 and 20 kms away from Paris. Note: the population density in 1846, at the very beginning of the rail development in the Paris Region, was 20.3% higher in municipalities connected to the 20th century rail network. It means that stations have not been randomly located. The population density in 1946 was 68.1% higher in municipalities connected to the suburban train network, suggesting that rail framed the urban development and increased population concentration in the Paris Region.

26 Table 7: Determinants of municipality selection for RER treatment - logistic regression (1) (2) (3) (4) Dependant variable: Presence of a RER station Distance to Paris: 5-20 km 20-35 km 5-20 km 20-35 km Intercept 0.316 6.757∗∗∗ 0.296 11.944 (0.428) (2.338) (0.624) (9.091) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Pop density1975 < 1000 −13.599 −14.161 −2.159 0.082 (0.478) (1.086) (0.802) (1.221) ∗∗ ∗ Pop density1975 [1000, 2500] −1.717 −1.175 −0.018 1.761 (0.709) (0.907) (0.66) (0.92) Pop density1975 [2500, 10000] ref. ref. ref. ref.

Pop density1975 > 10000 −0.193 0.499 (0.672) (1.118) ∗ ∗ Pop growth1946−75 0.034 0.071 −0.104 −0.146 (0.136) (0.151) (0.059) (0.076) Highway1990 0.568 0.465 (0.609) (0.785) Surface 0.115∗∗ 0.106 (0.057) (0.116) South 0.687 2.846∗∗ (0.86) (1.205) West −0.126 1.64 (0.684) (1.268) North ref. ref. East −1.124 −1.67 (0.835) (1.571) Maximum altitude −0.014∗∗ −0.011 (0.007) (0.009) ∗∗∗ 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km −3.288 (1.152) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 1.415 (0.962) 20km ≤ dP aris < 25km −0.945 (1.583) 25km ≤ dP aris < 30km ref.

30km ≤ dP aris ≤ 35km 2.756 (2.532) ∗∗ dP aris −0.445 −0.534 (0.184) (0.386) Number of observations 101 101 79 79 AIC 134 131 90 85 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters.

27 Table 8: Effect of RER on employment - other treatment variables (1) (2) (3) Dependant variable: ∆ log employment1975−90 Intercept 0.552∗∗∗ 0.428∗∗∗ 0.362∗∗∗ (0.126) (0.103) (0.106) Municipality share within 1km from a 0.234∗∗ RER station (0.1) Mun. share within 1km from an other −0.285∗∗ train station (0.121) Number of RER stations 0.105∗∗∗ (0.037) Number of train stations −0.052 (0.042) ∗∗ ∆timeP aris 1975−90 −0.02 (0.009) ∗∗ Highway1990 0.115 0.086 0.079 (0.054) (0.056) (0.053) 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.036 0.071 0.039 (0.084) (0.073) (0.068) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.012 0.029 0.044 (0.052) (0.057) (0.056) Job density1975 < 200 −0.395 −0.341 −0.313 (0.265) (0.273) (0.269) Job density1975 [200, 500] ref. ref. ref. ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 [500, 1000] −0.409 −0.372 −0.364 (0.088) (0.095) (0.103) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 [1000, 2500] −0.522 −0.481 −0.471 (0.102) (0.109) (0.119) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 > 2500 −0.597 −0.605 −0.589 (0.122) (0.111) (0.118) Maximum altitude 0.0007 0.0007 0.0006 (0.0006) (0.0005) (0.0005) South −0.083 −0.083 −0.039 (0.064) (0.062) (0.06) West −0.006 −0.052 −0.034 (0.073) (0.076) (0.076) North ref. ref. ref. East −0.03 −0.033 −0.034 (0.066) (0.063) (0.06) Number of observations 101 101 101 R2 0.501 0.463 0.436 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters and located between 5 and 20 kms away from Paris.

28 Table 9: Effect of RER on employment - placebo tests (1) (2) (3) (4) Dependant variable: ∆ log employment1968−75 Distance to Paris: 5-20 km 5-20 km 20-35 km 20-35 km Intercept −0.072 −0.053 0.139 0.153 (0.123) (0.125) (0.182) (0.181) RER1990 0.059 0.079 (0.043) (0.115) ∆timeP aris 1975−90 −0.002 −0.002 (0.007) (0.023) Highway1990 0.051 0.058 −0.067 −0.062 (0.047) (0.048) (0.083) (0.083) ∗ 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.088 0.077 (0.053) (0.052) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km 0.029 0.033 (0.057) (0.056) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ 20km ≤ dP aris < 25km 0.328 0.341 (0.106) (0.102) 25km ≤ dP aris < 30km ref. ref.

30km ≤ dP aris ≤ 35km 0.067 0.069 (0.132) (0.133) Job density1968 < 200 0.245 0.236 0.118 0.105 (0.162) (0.162) (0.104) (0.102) Job density1968 [200, 500] ref. ref. ref. ref.

Job density1968 [500, 1000] 0.068 0.084 −0.125 −0.132 (0.085) (0.089) (0.136) (0.136) Job density1968 [1000, 2500] −0.118 −0.09 −0.131 −0.124 (0.102) (0.108) (0.119) (0.142) ∗ ∗ Job density1968 > 2500 −0.2 −0.182 (0.101) (0.104) Maximum altitude 0.0003 0.0002 −0.001 −0.001 (0.0006) (0.0006) (0.001) (0.001) South 0.13∗∗ 0.137∗∗ 0.207 0.235∗ (0.063) (0.064) (0.148) (0.135) West 0.107 0.103 −0.006 −0.006 (0.082) (0.083) (0.127) (0.126) North ref. ref. ref. ref. East 0.114∗ 0.1 0.114 0.105 (0.064) (0.065) (0.17) (0.17) Number of observations 101 101 80 80 R2 0.235 0.226 0.257 0.251 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters.

29 Table 10: Effect of RER on employment at the municipality level - alternative interest variables

(1) (2) (3) Dependant variable: ∆ ln job1975−82 ∆ ln job1982−90 ∆ job density1982−90 Intercept −0.154 0.098 −42.833 (0.374) (0.062) (143.438) RER1982 0.034 (0.036) ∗∗ ∗∗ RER1990 0.072 201.124 (0.031) (90.43) Highway1990 0.069 0.019 −22.359 (0.045) (0.029) (77.845) 5km ≤ dP aris < 10km 0.058 0.013 213.963 (0.059) (0.05) (237.623) 10km ≤ dP aris < 15km ref. ref. ref.

15km ≤ dP aris < 20km −0.013 0.004 −7.386 (0.083) (0.028) (62.47) Maximum altitude −0.0003 0.0008∗∗∗ 1.814∗∗ (0.0004) (0.0003) (0.821) South −0.047 −0.009 120.759 (0.05) (0.039) (116.739) West −0.031 −0.008 −16.826 (0.058) (0.039) (83.107) North ref. ref. ref. East −0.048 0.029 106.223 (0.039) (0.043) (142.997) Job density1975 < 200 0.074 −178.763 (0.088) (113.249) Job density1975 [200, 500] 0.369 ref. ref. (0.313) ∗∗ ∗ Job density1975 [500, 1000] 0.123 −0.127 −137.902 (0.309) (0.061) (75.959) ∗∗∗ ∗ Job density1975 [1000, 2500] 0.079 −0.197 −182.949 (0.314) (0.066) (103.914) ∗∗∗ ∗∗∗ Job density1975 > 2500 −0.023 −0.22 −673.754 (0.313) (0.076) (245.442) Number of observations 101 101 101 R2 0.324 0.352 0.245 Note: Standard errors in parenthesis. Significance levels: ∗∗∗ 1%, ∗∗ 5%, ∗ 10%. All regressions are run on cities that had a train station in 1975, excluding economic subcenters and located between 5 and 20 kms away from Paris.

30 A.2 Map

Figure 6: Example of the route between and Cit´eUniversitaire with the RER

● 1975 (before RER) 1985 (with RER) N ● Le Bourget ● ● ● Le Bourget ●

● ● ●

Commuter train

●

● ●

●

●

●● Gare du Nord ● ●

● ● RER B

● ● ● ●

● ● ● ● ● Metro 4 ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

●● Denfert−Rochereau ● ●

● RER/commuter rail line Commuter train Metro line ● ● Cité Universitaire ● ● RER/commuter rail station ● ● Metro station ● 0 2 km Cité Uni−● versitaire Route ● ● ● Departure/connection/arrival Border of Paris

● ●

Note: before the commissioning of the RER, the journey between Cit´eUniversitaire and Le Bourget required two changes. First, you needed to take a commuter train station to the connection station Denfert-Rochereau. Then, you had to ride the metro line 4 to Gare du Nord. Finally, another commuter rail line led you to final destination, Le Bourget. Thanks to the RER, it is possible to cross Paris from Cit´eUniversitaire to Le Bourget without any connection, instead of two connections before, which lowers the journey time from 45 to 26 minutes.

31 Liste des documents de travail de la Direction des Études et Synthèses Économiques ii

G 9001 J. FAYOLLE et M. FLEURBAEY Macro-economic import functions with imperfect G 9311 J. BOURDIEU - B. COLIN-SEDILLOT analyse économique des politiques française et Accumulation, profitabilité et endettement des competition - An application to the E.C. Trade Les décisions de financement des entreprises allemande entreprises françaises : une évaluation empirique des théo- G 9203 I. STAPIC ries de la structure optimale du capital G 9412 J. BOURDIEU - B. CŒURÉ - G 9002 H. ROUSSE Les échanges internationaux de services de la B. COLIN-SEDILLOT Détection et effets de la multicolinéarité dans les France dans le cadre des négociations multila- G 9312 L. BLOCH - B. CŒURÉ Investissement, incertitude et irréversibilité modèles linéaires ordinaires - Un prolongement térales du GATT Q de Tobin marginal et transmission des chocs Quelques développements récents de la théorie de la réflexion de BELSLEY, KUH et WELSCH Juin 1992 (1ère version) financiers de l'investissement Novembre 1992 (version finale) G 9003 P. RALLE et J. TOUJAS-BERNATE G 9313 Équipes Amadeus (INSEE), Banque de France, G 9413 B. DORMONT - M. PAUCHET Indexation des salaires : la rupture de 1983 G 9204 P. SEVESTRE Métric (DP) L'évaluation de l'élasticité emploi-salaire dépend- L'économétrie sur données individuelles- Présentation des propriétés des principaux mo- elle des structures de qualification ? G 9004 D. GUELLEC et P. RALLE temporelles. Une note introductive dèles macroéconomiques du Service Public Compétitivité, croissance et innovation de produit G 9414 I. KABLA G 9205 H. ERKEL-ROUSSE G 9314 B. CREPON - E. DUGUET Le Choix de breveter une invention G 9005 P. RALLE et J. TOUJAS-BERNATE Le commerce extérieur et l'environnement in- Research & Development, competition and Les conséquences de la désindexation. Analyse ternational dans le modèle AMADEUS innovation G 9501 J. BOURDIEU - B. CŒURÉ - B. SEDILLOT dans une maquette prix-salaires (réestimation 1992) Irreversible Investment and Uncertainty: G 9315 B. DORMONT When is there a Value of Waiting? G 9101 Équipe AMADEUS G 9206 N. GREENAN et D. GUELLEC Quelle est l'influence du coût du travail sur Le modèle AMADEUS - Première partie - Coordination within the firm and endogenous l'emploi ? G 9502 L. BLOCH - B. CŒURÉ Présentation générale growth Imperfections du marché du crédit, investisse- G 9316 D. BLANCHET - C. BROUSSE ment des entreprises et cycle économique G 9102 J.L. BRILLET G 9207 A. MAGNIER et J. TOUJAS-BERNATE Deux études sur l'âge de la retraite Le modèle AMADEUS - Deuxième partie - Technology and trade: empirical evidences for G 9503 D. GOUX - E. MAURIN Propriétés variantielles the major five industrialized countries G 9317 D. BLANCHET Les transformations de la demande de travail par Répartition du travail dans une population hété- qualification en France G 9103 D. GUELLEC et P. RALLE G 9208 B. CREPON, E. DUGUET, D. ENCAOUA et rogène : deux notes Une étude sur la période 1970-1993 Endogenous growth and product innovation P. MOHNEN G 9318 D. EYSSARTIER - N. PONTY G 9504 N. GREENAN G 9104 H. ROUSSE Cooperative, non cooperative R & D and optimal patent life AMADEUS - an annual macro-economic model Technologie, changement organisationnel, qua- Le modèle AMADEUS - Troisième partie - Le for the medium and long term lifications et emploi : une étude empirique sur commerce extérieur et l'environnement G 9209 B. CREPON et E. DUGUET l'industrie manufacturière international Research and development, competition and G 9319 G. CETTE - Ph. CUNÉO - D. EYSSARTIER - J. GAUTIÉ G 9505 D. GOUX - E. MAURIN G 9105 H. ROUSSE innovation: an application of pseudo maximum likelihood methods to Poisson models with Les effets sur l'emploi d'un abaissement du coût Persistance des hiérarchies sectorielles de sa- Effets de demande et d'offre dans les résultats du travail des jeunes laires: un réexamen sur données françaises du commerce extérieur manufacturé de la France heterogeneity au cours des deux dernières décennies G 9301 J. TOUJAS-BERNATE G 9401 D. BLANCHET G 9505 D. GOUX - E. MAURIN Les structures par âge importent-elles ? Bis Persistence of inter-industry wages differentials: G 9106 B. CREPON Commerce international et concurrence impar- faite : développements récents et implications a reexamination on matched worker-firm panel Innovation, taille et concentration : causalités et G 9402 J. GAUTIÉ data dynamiques pour la politique commerciale Le chômage des jeunes en France : problème de G 9302 Ch. CASES formation ou phénomène de file d'attente ? G 9506 S. JACOBZONE G 9107 B. AMABLE et D. GUELLEC Quelques éléments du débat Les liens entre RMI et chômage, une mise en Un panorama des théories de la croissance Durées de chômage et comportements d'offre de travail : une revue de la littérature perspective endogène G 9403 P. QUIRION NON PARU - article sorti dans Économie et G 9303 H. ERKEL-ROUSSE Les déchets en France : éléments statistiques et Prévision n° 122 (1996) - pages 95 à 113 G 9108 M. GLAUDE et M. MOUTARDIER économiques Une évaluation du coût direct de l'enfant de 1979 Union économique et monétaire : le débat économique G 9507 G. CETTE - S. MAHFOUZ à 1989 G 9404 D. LADIRAY - M. GRUN-REHOMME Le partage primaire du revenu Lissage par moyennes mobiles - Le problème G 9109 P. RALLE et alii G 9304 N. GREENAN - D. GUELLEC / Constat descriptif sur longue période G. BROUSSAUDIER - L. MIOTTI des extrémités de série France - Allemagne : performances économi- G 9601 Banque de France - CEPREMAP - Direction de ques comparées Innovation organisationnelle, dynamisme tech- G 9405 V. MAILLARD nologique et performances des entreprises la Prévision - Érasme - INSEE - OFCE Théorie et pratique de la correction des effets de Structures et propriétés de cinq modèles macro- G 9110 J.L. BRILLET jours ouvrables Micro-DMS NON PARU G 9305 P. JAILLARD économiques français Le traité de Maastricht : présentation juridique et G 9406 F. ROSENWALD G 9602 Rapport d’activité de la DESE de l’année 1995 G 9111 A. MAGNIER historique La décision d'investir Effets accélérateur et multiplicateur en France G 9603 J. BOURDIEU - A. DRAZNIEKS depuis 1970 : quelques résultats empiriques G 9306 J.L. BRILLET G 9407 S. JACOBZONE Micro-DMS : présentation et propriétés L’octroi de crédit aux PME : une analyse à partir Les apports de l'économie industrielle pour dé- d’informations bancaires G 9112 B. CREPON et G. DUREAU finir la stratégie économique de l'hôpital public Investissement en recherche-développement : G 9307 J.L. BRILLET Micro-DMS - variantes : les tableaux G 9604 A. TOPIOL-BENSAÏD analyse de causalités dans un modèle d'accélé- G 9408 L. BLOCH, J. BOURDIEU, Les implantations japonaises en France rateur généralisé G 9308 S. JACOBZONE B. COLIN-SEDILLOT, G. LONGUEVILLE Du défaut de paiement au dépôt de bilan : les G 9605 P. GENIER - S. JACOBZONE G 9113 J.L. BRILLET, H. ERKEL-ROUSSE, J. TOUJAS- Les grands réseaux publics français dans une perspective européenne banquiers face aux PME en difficulté Comportements de prévention, consommation BERNATE d’alcool et tabagie : peut-on parler d’une gestion "France-Allemagne Couplées" - Deux économies G 9309 L. BLOCH - B. CŒURE G 9409 D. EYSSARTIER, P. MAIRE globale du capital santé ? vues par une maquette macro-économétrique Profitabilité de l'investissement productif et Impacts macro-économiques de mesures d'aide Une modélisation microéconométrique empirique transmission des chocs financiers au logement - quelques éléments d'évaluation G 9201 W.J. ADAMS, B. CREPON, D. ENCAOUA G 9606 C. DOZ - F. LENGLART Choix technologiques et stratégies de dissuasion G 9310 J. BOURDIEU - B. COLIN-SEDILLOT G 9410 F. ROSENWALD Factor analysis and unobserved component d'entrée Les théories sur la structure optimale du capital : Suivi conjoncturel de l'investissement models: an application to the study of French G 9202 J. OLIVEIRA-MARTINS, quelques points de repère G 9411 C. DEFEUILLEY - Ph. QUIRION business surveys J. TOUJAS -BERNATE Les déchets d'emballages ménagers : une G 9607 N. GREENAN - D. GUELLEC La théorie coopérative de la firme iii iv

G 9608 N. GREENAN - D. GUELLEC G 9714 F. LEQUILLER G 9808 A. MOUROUGANE G 9913 Division « Redistribution et Politiques Sociales » Technological innovation and employment Does the French Consumer Price Index Over- Can a Conservative Governor Conduct an Ac- Le modèle de microsimulation dynamique reallocation state Inflation? comodative Monetary Policy? DESTINIE G 9609 Ph. COUR - F. RUPPRECHT G 9715 X. BONNET G 9809 X. BONNET - E. DUBOIS - L. FAUVET G 9914 E. DUGUET L’intégration asymétrique au sein du continent Peut-on mettre en évidence les rigidités à la Asymétrie des inflations relatives et menus costs Macro-commandes SAS pour l’économétrie des américain : un essai de modélisation baisse des salaires nominaux ? : tests sur l’inflation française panels et des variables qualitatives Une étude sur quelques grands pays de l’OCDE G 9610 S. DUCHENE - G. FORGEOT - A. JACQUOT G 9810 E. DUGUET - N. IUNG G 9915 R. DUHAUTOIS Analyse des évolutions récentes de la producti- G 9716 N. IUNG - F. RUPPRECHT Sales and Advertising with Spillovers at the firm Évolution des flux d’emplois en France entre vité apparente du travail Productivité de la recherche et rendements level: Estimation of a Dynamic Structural Model 1990 et 1996 : une étude empirique à partir du d’échelle dans le secteur pharmaceutique on Panel Data fichier des bénéfices réels normaux (BRN) G 9611 X. BONNET - S. MAHFOUZ français The influence of different specifications of G 9811 J.P. BERTHIER G 9916 J.Y. FOURNIER wages-prices spirals on the measure of the G 9717 E. DUGUET - I. KABLA Congestion urbaine : un modèle de trafic de Extraction du cycle des affaires : la méthode de NAIRU: the case of France Appropriation strategy and the motivations to use pointe à courbe débit-vitesse et demande Baxter et King the patent system in France - An econometric élastique G 9612 PH. COUR - E. DUBOIS, S. MAHFOUZ, analysis at the firm level G 9917 B. CRÉPON - R. DESPLATZ - J. MAIRESSE J. PISANI-FERRY G 9812 C. PRIGENT Estimating price cost margins, scale economies The cost of fiscal retrenchment revisited: how G 9718 L.P. PELÉ - P. RALLE La part des salaires dans la valeur ajoutée : une and workers’ bargaining power at the firm level strong is the evidence? Âge de la retraite : les aspects incitatifs du ré- approche macroéconomique gime général G 9918 Ch. GIANELLA - Ph. LAGARDE G 9613 A. JACQUOT G 9813 A.Th. AERTS Productivity of hours in the aggregate production Les flexions des taux d’activité sont-elles seule- G 9719 ZHANG Yingxiang - SONG Xueqing L’évolution de la part des salaires dans la valeur function: an evaluation on a panel of French ment conjoncturelles ? Lexique macroéconomique français-chinois, ajoutée en France reflète-t-elle les évolutions firms from the manufacturing sector chinois-français individuelles sur la période 1979-1994 ? G 9614 ZHANG Yingxiang - SONG Xueqing G 9919 S. AUDRIC - P. GIVORD - C. PROST Lexique macroéconomique Français-Chinois G 9720 M. HOUDEBINE - J.L. SCHNEIDER G 9814 B. SALANIÉ Évolution de l’emploi et des coûts par quali- Mesurer l’influence de la fiscalité sur la locali- Guide pratique des séries non-stationnaires fication entre 1982 et 1996 G 9701 J.L. SCHNEIDER sation des entreprises La taxe professionnelle : éléments de cadrage G 9901 S. DUCHÊNE - A. JACQUOT G 2000/01 R. MAHIEU économique G 9721 A. MOUROUGANE Une croissance plus riche en emplois depuis le Les déterminants des dépenses de santé : une Crédibilité, indépendance et politique monétaire début de la décennie ? Une analyse en compa- approche macroéconomique G 9702 J.L. SCHNEIDER Une revue de la littérature raison internationale Transition et stabilité politique d’un système G 2000/02 C. ALLARD-PRIGENT - H. GUILMEAU - redistributif G 9722 P. AUGERAUD - L. BRIOT G 9902 Ch. COLIN A. QUINET Les données comptables d’entreprises Modélisation des carrières dans Destinie The real exchange rate as the relative price of G 9703 D. GOUX - E. MAURIN Le système intermédiaire d’entreprises nontrables in terms of tradables: theoretical Train or Pay: Does it Reduce Inequalities to En- Passage des données individuelles aux données G 9903 Ch. COLIN investigation and empirical study on French data courage Firms to Train their Workers? sectorielles Évolution de la dispersion des salaires : un essai de prospective par microsimulation G 2000/03 J.-Y. FOURNIER G 9704 P. GENIER G 9723 P. AUGERAUD - J.E. CHAPRON L’approximation du filtre passe-bande proposée Deux contributions sur dépendance et équité Using Business Accounts for Compiling National G 9904 B. CREPON - N. IUNG par Christiano et Fitzgerald Accounts: the French Experience Innovation, emploi et performances G 9705 E. DUGUET - N. IUNG G 2000/04 Bilan des activités de la DESE - 1999 R & D Investment, Patent Life and Patent Value G 9724 P. AUGERAUD G 9905 B. CREPON - Ch. GIANELLA An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level Les comptes d’entreprise par activités - Le pas- Wages inequalities in France 1969-1992 G 2000/05 B. CREPON - F. ROSENWALD An application of quantile regression techniques Investissement et contraintes de financement : le G 9706 M. HOUDEBINE - A. TOPIOL-BENSAÏD sage aux comptes - De la comptabilité d’entreprise à la comptabilité nationale - A poids du cycle Les entreprises internationales en France : une G 9906 C. BONNET - R. MAHIEU Une estimation sur données françaises analyse à partir de données individuelles paraître Microsimulation techniques applied to inter- G 9801 H. MICHAUDON - C. PRIGENT generational transfers - Pensions in a dynamic G 2000/06 A. FLIPO G 9707 M. HOUDEBINE framework: the case of France Les comportements matrimoniaux de fait Polarisation des activités et spécialisation des Présentation du modèle AMADEUS départements en France G 9802 J. ACCARDO G 9907 F. ROSENWALD G 2000/07 R. MAHIEU - B. SÉDILLOT Une étude de comptabilité générationnelle L’impact des contraintes financières dans la dé- Microsimulations of the retirement decision: a G 9708 E. DUGUET - N. GREENAN cision d’investissement supply side approach Le biais technologique : une analyse sur don- pour la France en 1996 nées individuelles G 9803 X. BONNET - S. DUCHÊNE G 9908 Bilan des activités de la DESE - 1998 G 2000/08 C. AUDENIS - C. PROST Apports et limites de la modélisation Déficit conjoncturel : une prise en compte des G 9709 J.L. BRILLET G 9909 J.P. ZOYEM conjonctures passées Analyzing a small French ECM Model « Real Business Cycles » Contrat d’insertion et sortie du RMI Évaluation des effets d’une politique sociale G 2000/09 R. MAHIEU - B. SÉDILLOT G 9710 J.L. BRILLET G 9804 C. BARLET - C. DUGUET - D. ENCAOUA - J. PRADEL Équivalent patrimonial de la rente et souscription Formalizing the transition process: scenarios for G 9910 Ch. COLIN - Fl. LEGROS - R. MAHIEU de retraite complémentaire capital accumulation The Commercial Success of Innovations Bilans contributifs comparés des régimes de An econometric analysis at the firm level in retraite du secteur privé et de la fonction G 2000/10 R. DUHAUTOIS G 9711 G. FORGEOT - J. GAUTIÉ French manufacturing publique Ralentissement de l’investissement : petites ou Insertion professionnelle des jeunes et proces- grandes entreprises ? industrie ou tertiaire ? sus de déclassement G 9805 P. CAHUC - Ch. GIANELLA - G 9911 G. LAROQUE - B. SALANIÉ D. GOUX - A. ZILBERBERG Une décomposition du non-emploi en France G 2000/11 G. LAROQUE - B. SALANIÉ G 9712 E. DUBOIS Equalizing Wage Differences and Bargaining Temps partiel féminin et incitations financières à High Real Interest Rates: the Consequence of a Power - Evidence form a Panel of French Firms G 9912 B. SALANIÉ l’emploi Saving Investment Disequilibrium or of an in- Une maquette analytique de long terme du sufficient Credibility of Monetary Authorities? G 9806 J. ACCARDO - M. JLASSI marché du travail G2000/12 Ch. GIANELLA La productivité globale des facteurs entre 1975 Local unemployment and wages G 9713 Bilan des activités de la Direction des Études et 1996 G 9912 Ch. GIANELLA et Synthèses Économiques - 1996 Bis Une estimation de l’élasticité de l’emploi peu G 9807 Bilan des activités de la Direction des Études et qualifié à son coût Synthèses Économiques - 1997 v vi

G2000/13 B. CREPON - Th. HECKEL G2001/17 C. AUDENIS - P. BISCOURP - N. RIEDINGER G2002/15 P. CHONE - D. LE BLANC - I. ROBERT-BOBEE G2004/05 N. RAGACHE - Informatisation en France : une évaluation à Existe-t-il une asymétrie dans la transmission du Offre de travail féminine et garde des jeunes La déclaration des enfants par les couples non partir de données individuelles prix du brut aux prix des carburants ? enfants mariés est-elle fiscalement optimale ? - Computerization in France: an evaluation based on individual company data G2002/01 F. MAGNIEN - J.-L. TAVERNIER - D. THESMAR G2002/16 F. MAUREL - S. GREGOIR G2004/06 M. DUÉE Les statistiques internationales de PIB par Les indices de compétitivité des pays : inter- L’impact du chômage des parents sur le devenir G2001/01 F. LEQUILLER habitant en standard de pouvoir d’achat : une prétation et limites scolaire des enfants - La nouvelle économie et la mesure analyse des résultats de la croissance du PIB G2003/01 N. RIEDINGER - E.HAUVY G2004/07 P. AUBERT - E. CAROLI - M. ROGER - The new economy and the measure G2002/02 Bilan des activités de la DESE - 2001 Le coût de dépollution atmosphérique pour les New Technologies, Workplace Organisation and ment of GDP growth entreprises françaises : Une estimation à partir the Age Structure of the Workforce: Firm-Level G2002/03 B. SÉDILLOT - E. WALRAET de données individuelles Evidence G2001/02 S. AUDRIC La cessation d’activité au sein des couples : y a- La reprise de la croissance de l’emploi profite-t- t-il interdépendance des choix ? G2003/02 P. BISCOURP et F. KRAMARZ G2004/08 E. DUGUET - C. LELARGE elle aussi aux non-diplômés ? Création d’emplois, destruction d’emplois et Les brevets accroissent-ils les incitations privées G2002/04 G. BRILHAULT internationalisation des entreprises industrielles à innover ? Un examen microéconométrique G2001/03 I. BRAUN-LEMAIRE - Rétropolation des séries de FBCF et calcul du françaises : une analyse sur la période 1986- Évolution et répartition du surplus de productivité capital fixe en SEC-95 dans les comptes 1992 G2004/09 S. RASPILLER - P. SILLARD nationaux français Affiliating versus Subcontracting: G2001/04 A. BEAUDU - Th. HECKEL - Retropolation of the investment series (GFCF) G2003/03 Bilan des activités de la DESE - 2002 the Case of Multinationals Le canal du crédit fonctionne-t-il en Europe ? and estimation of fixed capital stocks on the Une étude de l’hétérogénéité des com- ESA-95 basis for the French balance sheets G2003/04 P.-O. BEFFY - J. DEROYON - G2004/10 J. BOISSINOT - C. L’ANGEVIN - B. MONFORT portements d’investissement à partir de données N. FOURCADE - S. GREGOIR - N. LAÏB - Public Debt Sustainability: Some Results on the de bilan agrégées G2002/05 P. BISCOURP - B. CRÉPON - T. HECKEL - N. B. MONFORT French Case RIEDINGER Évolutions démographiques et croissance : une G2001/05 C. AUDENIS - P. BISCOURP - How do firms respond to cheaper computers? projection macro-économique à l’horizon 2020 G2004/11 S. ANANIAN - P. AUBERT N. FOURCADE - O. LOISEL Microeconometric evidence for France based on Travailleurs âgés, nouvelles technologies Testing the augmented Solow growth model: An a production function approach G2003/05 P. AUBERT et changements organisationnels : un réexamen empirical reassessment using panel data La situation des salariés de plus de cinquante à partir de l’enquête « REPONSE » G2002/06 C. AUDENIS - J. DEROYON - N. FOURCADE ans dans le secteur privé G2001/06 R. MAHIEU - B. SÉDILLOT L’impact des nouvelles technologies de G2004/12 X. BONNET - H. PONCET Départ à la retraite, irréversibilité et incertitude l’information et de la communication sur G2003/06 P. AUBERT - B. CRÉPON Structures de revenus et propensions différentes l’économie française - un bouclage macro- Age, salaire et productivité à consommer - Vers une équation de G2001/07 Bilan des activités de la DESE - 2000 économique La productivité des salariés décline-t-elle en fin consommation des ménages plus robuste en de carrière ? prévision pour la France G2001/08 J. Ph. GAUDEMET G2002/07 J. BARDAJI - B. SÉDILLOT - E. WALRAET Les dispositifs d’acquisition à titre facultatif Évaluation de trois réformes du Régime Général G2003/07 H. BARON - P.O. BEFFY - N. FOURCADE - R. G2004/13 C. PICART d’annuités viagères de retraite d’assurance vieillesse à l’aide du modèle de MAHIEU Évaluer la rentabilité des sociétés non microsimulation DESTINIE Le ralentissement de la productivité du travail au financières G2001/09 B. CRÉPON - Ch. GIANELLA cours des années 1990 Fiscalité, coût d’usage du capital et demande de G2002/08 J.-P. BERTHIER G2004/14 J. BARDAJI - B. SÉDILLOT - E. WALRAET facteurs : une analyse sur données individuelles Réflexions sur les différentes notions de volume G2003/08 P.-O. BEFFY - B. MONFORT Les retraites du secteur public : projections à Patrimoine des ménages, dynamique d’allocation l’horizon 2040 à l’aide du modèle de G2001/10 B. CRÉPON - R. DESPLATZ dans les comptes nationaux : comptes aux prix et comportement de consommation microsimulation DESTINIE Évaluation des effets des dispositifs d’une année fixe ou aux prix de l’année d’allégements précédente, séries chaînées G2003/09 P. BISCOURP - N. FOURCADE G2005/01 S. BUFFETEAU - P. GODEFROY de charges sociales sur les bas salaires G2002/09 F. HILD Peut-on mettre en évidence l’existence de Conditions de départ en retraite selon l’âge de fin rigidités à la baisse des salaires à partir de d’études : analyse prospective pour les G2001/11 J.-Y. FOURNIER Les soldes d’opinion résument-ils au mieux les réponses des entreprises aux enquêtes de données individuelles ? Le cas de la France à la générations 1945 à1974 Comparaison des salaires des secteurs public et fin des années 90 privé conjoncture ? G2005/02 C. AFSA - S. BUFFETEAU G2002/10 I. ROBERT-BOBÉE G2003/10 M. LECLAIR - P. PETIT L’évolution de l’activité féminine en France : G2001/12 J.-P. BERTHIER - C. JAULENT Présence syndicale dans les firmes : quel impact une approche par pseudo-panel R. CONVENEVOLE - S. PISANI Les comportements démographiques dans le modèle de microsimulation Destinie - Une sur les inégalités salariales entre les hommes et Une méthodologie de comparaison entre les femmes ? G2005/03 P. AUBERT - P. SILLARD consommations intermédiaires de source fiscale comparaison des estimations issues des Délocalisations et réductions d’effectifs et de comptabilité nationale enquêtes Jeunes et Carrières 1997 et Histoire G2003/11 P.-O. BEFFY - X. BONNET - M. DARRACQ- dans l’industrie française Familiale 1999 PARIES - B. MONFORT G2001/13 P. BISCOURP - Ch. GIANELLA MZE: a small macro-model for the euro area G2005/04 M. LECLAIR - S. ROUX Substitution and complementarity between G2002/11 J.-P. ZOYEM Mesure et utilisation des emplois instables capital, skilled and less skilled workers: an La dynamique des bas revenus : une analyse G2004/01 P. AUBERT - M. LECLAIR dans les entreprises analysis at the firm level in the French des entrées-sorties de pauvreté La compétitivité exprimée dans les enquêtes G2005/05 C. L’ANGEVIN - S. SERRAVALLE manufacturing industry G2002/12 F. HILD trimestrielles sur la situation et les perspectives dans l’industrie Performances à l’exportation de la France G2001/14 I. ROBERT-BOBEE Prévisions d’inflation pour la France et de l’Allemagne - Une analyse par secteur et Modelling demographic behaviours in the French G2002/13 M. LECLAIR G2004/02 M. DUÉE - C. REBILLARD destination géographique microsimulation model Destinie: An analysis of Réduction du temps de travail et tensions sur les La dépendance des personnes âgées : une future change in completed fertility projection à long terme G2005/06 Bilan des activités de la Direction des Études et facteurs de production Synthèses Économiques - 2004 G2001/15 J.-P. ZOYEM G2002/14 E. WALRAET - A. VINCENT G2004/03 S. RASPILLER - N. RIEDINGER Diagnostic sur la pauvreté et calendrier de Régulation environnementale et choix de G2005/07 S. RASPILLER - Analyse de la redistribution intragénérationnelle La concurrence fiscale : principaux enseigne- revenus : le cas du “Panel européen des dans le système de retraite des salariés du privé localisation des groupes français ménages » ments de l’analyse économique - Une approche par microsimulation G2004/04 A. NABOULET - S. RASPILLER G2001/16 J.-Y. FOURNIER - P. GIVORD - Intragenerational distributional analysis in the Les déterminants de la décision d’investir : une G2005/08 C. L’ANGEVIN - N. LAÏB La réduction des taux d’activité aux âges french private sector pension scheme - A approche par les perceptions subjectives des Éducation et croissance en France et dans un extrêmes, une spécificité française ? microsimulation approach firmes panel de 21 pays de l’OCDE vii viii

G2005/09 N. FERRARI G2006/10 C. AFSA G2008/02 P. BISCOURP - X. BOUTIN - T. VERGÉ G2009/07 S. QUANTIN - S. RASPILLER - S. SERRAVALLE Prévoir l’investissement des entreprises L’estimation d’un coût implicite de la pénibilité du The Effects of Retail Regulations on Prices Commerce intragroupe, fiscalité et prix de Un indicateur des révisions dans l’enquête de travail chez les travailleurs âgés Evidence form the Loi Galland transferts : une analyse sur données françaises conjoncture sur les investissements dans l’industrie. G2006/11 C. LELARGE G2008/03 Y. BARBESOL - A. BRIANT G2009/08 M. CLERC - V. MARCUS Les entreprises (industrielles) françaises sont- Économies d’agglomération et productivité des Élasticités-prix des consommations énergétiques G2005/10 P.-O. BEFFY - C. L’ANGEVIN elles à la frontière technologique ? entreprises : estimation sur données individuelles des ménages Chômage et boucle prix-salaires : françaises apport d’un modèle « qualifiés/peu qualifiés » G2006/12 O. BIAU - N. FERRARI G2009/09 G. LALANNE - E. POULIQUEN - O. SIMON Théorie de l’opinion G2008/04 D. BLANCHET - F. LE GALLO Prix du pétrole et croissance potentielle à long G2005/11 B. HEITZ Faut-il pondérer les réponses individuelles ? Les projections démographiques : principaux terme A two-states Markov-switching model of inflation mécanismes et retour sur l’expérience française in France and the USA: credible target VS G2006/13 A. KOUBI - S. ROUX G2009/10 D. BLANCHET - J. LE CACHEUX - V. MARCUS inflation spiral Une réinterprétation de la relation entre G2008/05 D. BLANCHET - F. TOUTLEMONDE Adjusted net savings and other approaches to productivité et inégalités salariales dans les Évolutions démographiques et déformation du sustainability: some theoretical background G2005/12 O. BIAU - H. ERKEL-ROUSSE - N. FERRARI entreprises cycle de vie active : quelles relations ? Réponses individuelles aux enquêtes de G2009/11 V. BELLAMY - G. CONSALES - M. FESSEAU - conjoncture et prévision macroéconomiques : G2006/14 R. RATHELOT - P. SILLARD G2008/06 M. BARLET - D. BLANCHET - L. CRUSSON S. LE LAIDIER - É. RAYNAUD Exemple de la prévision de la production The impact of local taxes on plants location Internationalisation et flux d’emplois : que dit une Une décomposition du compte des ménages de manufacturière decision approche comptable ? la comptabilité nationale par catégorie de ménage en 2003 G2005/13 P. AUBERT - D. BLANCHET - D. BLAU G2006/15 L. GONZALEZ - C. PICART G2008/07 C. LELARGE - D. SRAER - D. THESMAR The labour market after age 50: some elements Diversification, recentrage et poids des activités Entrepreneurship and Credit Constraints - G2009/12 J. BARDAJI - F. TALLET of a Franco-American comparison de support dans les groupes (1993-2000) Evidence from a French Loan Guarantee Detecting Economic Regimes in France: a Program Qualitative Markov-Switching Indicator Using G2005/14 D. BLANCHET - T. DEBRAND - G2007/01 D. SRAER Mixed Frequency Data P. DOURGNON - P. POLLET Allègements de cotisations patronales et G2008/08 X. BOUTIN - L. JANIN L’enquête SHARE : présentation et premiers dynamique salariale Are Prices Really Affected by Mergers? G2009/13 R. AEBERHARDT - D. FOUGÈRE - résultats de l’édition française R. RATHELOT G2007/02 V. ALBOUY - L. LEQUIEN G2008/09 M. BARLET - A. BRIANT - L. CRUSSON Discrimination à l’embauche : comment exploiter G2005/15 M. DUÉE Les rendements non monétaires de l’éducation : Concentration géographique dans l’industrie les procédures de testing ? La modélisation des comportements démogra- le cas de la santé manufacturière et dans les services en France : phiques dans le modèle de microsimulation une approche par un indicateur en continu G2009/14 Y. BARBESOL - P. GIVORD - S. QUANTIN G2007/03 D. BLANCHET - T. DEBRAND Partage de la valeur ajoutée, approche par DESTINIE Aspiration à la retraite, santé et satisfaction au G2008/10 M. BEFFY - É. COUDIN - R. RATHELOT données microéconomiques G2005/16 H. RAOUI - S. ROUX travail : une comparaison européenne Who is confronted to insecure labor market histories? Some evidence based on the French G2009/15 I. BUONO - G. LALANNE Étude de simulation sur la participation versée G2007/04 M. BARLET - L. CRUSSON aux salariés par les entreprises labor market transition The Effect of the Uruguay round on the Intensive Quel impact des variations du prix du pétrole sur and Extensive Margins of Trade G2006/01 C. BONNET - S. BUFFETEAU - P. GODEFROY la croissance française ? G2008/11 M. ROGER - E. WALRAET Social Security and Well-Being of the Elderly: the G2010/01 C. MINODIER Disparités de retraite de droit direct entre G2007/05 C. PICART hommes et femmes : quelles évolutions ? Case of France Avantages comparés des séries des premières Flux d’emploi et de main-d’œuvre en France : un valeurs publiées et des séries des valeurs G2006/02 C. PICART réexamen G2008/12 C. AFSA révisées - Un exercice de prévision en temps réel Les gazelles en France Analyser les composantes du bien-être et de son de la croissance trimestrielle du PIB en France G2007/06 V. ALBOUY - C. TAVAN évolution G2006/03 P. AUBERT - B. CRÉPON -P. ZAMORA Massification et démocratisation de Une approche empirique sur données G2010/02 V. ALBOUY - L. DAVEZIES - T. DEBRAND Le rendement apparent de la formation continue l’enseignement supérieur en France individuelles Health Expenditure Models: a Comparison of dans les entreprises : effets sur la productivité et G2007/07 T. LE BARBANCHON Five Specifications using Panel Data les salaires G2008/13 M. BARLET - D. BLANCHET - The Changing response to oil price shocks in T. LE BARBANCHON G2010/03 C. KLEIN - O. SIMON G2006/04 J.-F. OUVRARD - R. RATHELOT France: a DSGE type approach Microsimuler le marché du travail : un prototype Le modèle MÉSANGE réestimé en base 2000 Demographic change and unemployment: G2007/08 T. CHANEY - D. SRAER - D. THESMAR Tome 1 – Version avec volumes à prix constants what do macroeconometric models predict? G2009/01 P.-A. PIONNIER Collateral Value and Corporate Investment Le partage de la valeur ajoutée en France, G2010/04 M.-É. CLERC - É. COUDIN G2006/05 D. BLANCHET - J.-F. OUVRARD Evidence from the French Real Estate Market 1949-2007 L’IPC, miroir de l’évolution du coût de la vie en Indicateurs d’engagements implicites des G2007/09 J. BOISSINOT France ? Ce qu’apporte l’analyse des courbes systèmes de retraite : chiffrages, propriétés G2009/02 Laurent CLAVEL - Christelle MINODIER d’Engel Consumption over the Life Cycle: Facts for A Monthly Indicator of the French Business analytiques et réactions à des chocs France démographiques types Climate G2010/05 N. CECI-RENAUD - P.-A. CHEVALIER G2007/10 C. AFSA Les seuils de 10, 20 et 50 salariés : impact sur la G2006/06 G. BIAU - O. BIAU - L. ROUVIERE G2009/03 H. ERKEL-ROUSSE - C. MINODIER taille des entreprises françaises Interpréter les variables de satisfaction : Do Business Tendency Surveys in Industry and Nonparametric Forecasting of the Manufacturing l’exemple de la durée du travail Output Growth with Firm-level Survey Data Services Help in Forecasting GDP Growth? G2010/06 R. AEBERHARDT - J. POUGET G2007/11 R. RATHELOT - P. SILLARD A Real-Time Analysis on French Data National Origin Differences in Wages and G2006/07 C. AFSA - P. GIVORD Hierarchical Positions - Evidence on French Full- Zones Franches Urbaines : quels effets sur G2009/04 P. GIVORD - L. WILNER Le rôle des conditions de travail dans les l’emploi salarié et les créations Time Male Workers from a matched Employer- absences pour maladie Les contrats temporaires : trappe ou marchepied Employee Dataset d’établissements ? vers l’emploi stable ? G2006/08 P. SILLARD - C. L’ANGEVIN - S. SERRAVALLE G2007/12 V. ALBOUY - B. CRÉPON G2010/07 S. BLASCO - P. GIVORD Performances comparées à l’exportation de la G2009/05 G. LALANNE - P.-A. PIONNIER - O. SIMON Les trajectoires professionnelles en début de vie Aléa moral en santé : une évaluation dans le Le partage des fruits de la croissance de 1950 à France et de ses principaux partenaires cadre du modèle causal de Rubin active : quel impact des contrats temporaires ? Une analyse structurelle sur 12 ans 2008 : une approche par les comptes de surplus G2008/01 C. PICART G2010/08 P. GIVORD G2006/09 X. BOUTIN - S. QUANTIN G2009/06 L. DAVEZIES - X. D’HAULTFOEUILLE Méthodes économétriques pour l’évaluation de Les PME françaises : rentables mais peu Faut-il pondérer ?… Ou l’éternelle question de Une méthodologie d’évaluation comptable du dynamiques politiques publiques coût du capital des entreprises françaises : 1984- l’économètre confronté à des données d’enquête 2002 ix x

G2010/09 P.-Y. CABANNES - V. LAPÈGUE - G2011/07 M. CLERC - M. GAINI - D. BLANCHET G2012/08 A. EIDELMAN - F. LANGUMIER - A. VICARD G2013/11 P. CHONÉ - F. EVAIN - L. WILNER - E. YILMAZ E. POULIQUEN - M. BEFFY - M. GAINI Recommendations of the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Prélèvements obligatoires reposant sur les Introducing activity-based payment in the Quelle croissance de moyen terme après la Report: A few illustrations ménages : des canaux redistributifs différents en hospital industry : Evidence from French data crise ? 1990 et 2010 G2011/08 M. BACHELET - M. BEFFY - D. BLANCHET G2013/12 C. GRISLAIN-LETRÉMY G2010/10 I. BUONO - G. LALANNE Projeter l’impact des réformes des retraites sur G2012/09 O. BARGAIN - A. VICARD Natural Disasters: Exposure and Underinsurance La réaction des entreprises françaises l’activité des 55 ans et plus : une comparaison de Le RMI et son successeur le RSA découragent- à la baisse des tarifs douaniers étrangers trois modèles ils certains jeunes de travailler ? Une analyse sur G2013/13 P.-Y. CABANNES - V. COTTET - Y. DUBOIS - les jeunes autour de 25 ans C. LELARGE - M. SICSIC G2010/11 R. RATHELOT - P. SILLARD G2011/09 C. LOUVOT-RUNAVOT French Firms in the Face of the 2008/2009 Crisis L’apport des méthodes à noyaux pour mesurer la L’évaluation de l’activité dissimulée des entre- G2012/10 C. MARBOT - D. ROY concentration géographique - Application à la prises sur la base des contrôles fiscaux et son Projections du coût de l’APA et des G2013/14 A. POISSONNIER - D. ROY concentration des immigrés en France de 1968 à insertion dans les comptes nationaux caractéristiques de ses bénéficiaires à l’horizon Households Satellite Account for France in 2010. 1999 2040 à l’aide du modèle Destinie Methodological issues on the assessment of G2011/10 A. SCHREIBER - A. VICARD domestic production G2010/12 M. BARATON - M. BEFFY - D. FOUGÈRE La tertiarisation de l’économie française et le G2012/11 A. MAUROUX Une évaluation de l’effet de la réforme de 2003 ralentissement de la productivité entre 1978 et Le crédit d’impôt dédié au développement G2013/15 G. CLÉAUD - M. LEMOINE - P.-A. PIONNIER sur les départs en retraite - Le cas des 2008 durable : une évaluation économétrique Which size and evolution of the government enseignants du second degré public expenditure multiplier in France (1980-2010)? G2011/11 M.-É. CLERC - O. MONSO - E. POULIQUEN G2012/12 V. COTTET - S. QUANTIN - V. RÉGNIER G2010/13 D. BLANCHET - S. BUFFETEAU - E. CRENNER Les inégalités entre générations depuis le baby- Coût du travail et allègements de charges : une G2014/01 M. BACHELET - A. LEDUC - A. MARINO S. LE MINEZ boom estimation au niveau établissement de 1996 à Les biographies du modèle Destinie II : rebasage Le modèle de microsimulation Destinie 2 : 2008 et projection principales caractéristiques et premiers résultats G2011/12 C. MARBOT - D. ROY Évaluation de la transformation de la réduction G2012/13 X. D’HAULTFOEUILLE - P. FÉVRIER - G2014/02 B. GARBINTI G2010/14 D. BLANCHET - E. CRENNER d'impôt en crédit d'impôt pour l'emploi de salariés L. WILNER L’achat de la résidence principale et la création Le bloc retraites du modèle Destinie 2 : à domicile en 2007 Demand Estimation in the Presence of Revenue d’entreprises sont-ils favorisés par les donations guide de l’utilisateur Management et héritages ? G2011/13 P. GIVORD - R. RATHELOT - P. SILLARD G2010/15 M. BARLET - L. CRUSSON - S. DUPUCH - Place-based tax exemptions and displacement G2012/14 D. BLANCHET - S. LE MINEZ G2014/03 N. CECI-RENAUD - P. CHARNOZ - M. GAINI F. PUECH effects: An evaluation of the Zones Franches Joint macro/micro evaluations of accrued-to-date Évolution de la volatilité des revenus salariaux du Des services échangés aux services échan- Urbaines program pension liabilities: an application to French secteur privé en France depuis 1968 geables : une application sur données françaises reforms G2011/14 X. D’HAULTFOEUILLE - P. GIVORD - G2014/04 P. AUBERT G2010/16 M. BEFFY - T. KAMIONKA X. BOUTIN G2013/01- T. DEROYON - A. MONTAUT - P-A PIONNIER Modalités d’application des réformes des Public-private wage gaps: is civil-servant human The Environmental Effect of Green Taxation: the F1301 Utilisation rétrospective de l’enquête Emploi à retraites et prévisibilité du montant de pension capital sector-specific? Case of the French “Bonus/Malus” une fréquence mensuelle : apport d’une G2014/05 C. GRISLAIN-LETRÉMY - A. KATOSSKY modélisation espace-état G2010/17 P.-Y. CABANNES - H. ERKEL-ROUSSE - G2011/15 M. BARLET - M. CLERC - M. GARNEO - The Impact of Hazardous Industrial Facilities on G. LALANNE - O. MONSO - E. POULIQUEN V. LAPÈGUE - V. MARCUS G2013/02- C. TREVIEN Housing Prices: A Comparison of Parametric and Le modèle Mésange réestimé en base 2000 La nouvelle version du modèle MZE, modèle F1302 Habiter en HLM : quel avantage monétaire et Semiparametric Hedonic Price Models Tome 2 - Version avec volumes à prix chaînés macroéconométrique pour la zone euro quel impact sur les conditions de logement ? G2014//06 J.-M. DAUSSIN-BENICHOU - A. MAUROUX G2010/18 R. AEBERHARDT - L. DAVEZIES G2011/16 R. AEBERHARDT - I. BUONO - H. FADINGER G2013/03 A. POISSONNIER Turning the heat up. How sensitive are Conditional Logit with one Binary Covariate: Link Learning, Incomplete Contracts and Export Temporal disaggregation of stock variables - The households to fiscal incentives on energy between the Static and Dynamic Cases Dynamics: Theory and Evidence form French Chow-Lin method extended to dynamic models efficiency investments? Firms G2011/01 T. LE BARBANCHON - B. OURLIAC - O. SIMON G2013/04 P. GIVORD - C. MARBOT G2014/07 C. LABONNE - G. LAMÉ Les marchés du travail français et américain face G2011/17 C. KERDRAIN - V. LAPÈGUE Does the cost of child care affect female labor Credit Growth and Capital Requirements: Binding aux chocs conjoncturels des années 1986 à Restrictive Fiscal Policies in Europe: market participation? An evaluation of a French or Not? 2007 : une modélisation DSGE What are the Likely Effects? reform of childcare subsidies G2014/08 C. GRISLAIN-LETRÉMY et C. TREVIEN G2011/02 C. MARBOT G2012/01 P. GIVORD - S. QUANTIN - C. TREVIEN G2013/05 G. LAME - M. LEQUIEN - P.-A. PIONNIER The Impact of Housing Subsidies on the Rental Une évaluation de la réduction d’impôt pour A Long-Term Evaluation of the First Generation Interpretation and limits of sustainability tests in Sector: the French Example l’emploi de salariés à domicile of the French Urban Enterprise Zones public finance G2014 09 M. LEQUIEN et A. MONTAUT G2011/03 L. DAVEZIES G2012/02 N. CECI-RENAUD - V. COTTET G2013/06 C. BELLEGO - V. DORTET-BERNADET Croissance potentielle en France et en zone Modèles à effets fixes, à effets aléatoires, Politique salariale et performance des La participation aux pôles de compétitivité : euro : un tour d’horizon des méthodes modèles mixtes ou multi-niveaux : propriétés et entreprises quelle incidence sur les dépenses de R&D et d’estimation mises en œuvre des modélisations de l’activité des PME et ETI ? G2014/10 B. GARBINTI - P. LAMARCHE l’hétérogénéité dans le cas de données groupées G2012/03 P. FÉVRIER - L. WILNER Do Consumers Correctly Expect Price G2013/07 P.-Y. CABANNES - A. MONTAUT - Les hauts revenus épargnent-ils davantage ? G2011/04 M. ROGER - M. WASMER Reductions? Testing Dynamic Behavior P.-A. PIONNIER G2014/11 D. AUDENAERT - J. BARDAJI - R. LARDEUX - Heterogeneity matters: labour productivity Évaluer la productivité globale des facteurs en G2012/04 M. GAINI - A. LEDUC - A. VICARD M. ORAND - M. SICSIC differentiated by age and skills France : l’apport d’une mesure de la qualité du Wage Resilience in France since the Great School as a shelter? School leaving-age and the capital et du travail G2011/05 J.-C. BRICONGNE - J.-M. FOURNIER business cycle in France Recession V. LAPÈGUE - O. MONSO G2013/08 R. AEBERHARDT - C. MARBOT G2012/05 M. GAINI - A. LEDUC - A. VICARD G2014/12 F. ARNAUD - J. BOUSSARD - A. POISSONNIER De la crise financière à la crise économique Evolution of Instability on the French Labour - H. SOUAL L’impact des perturbations financières de 2007 et A scarred generation? French evidence on young Market During the Last Thirty Years people entering into a tough labour market Computing additive contributions to growth and 2008 sur la croissance de sept pays other issues for chain-linked quarterly industrialisés G2013/09 J-B. BERNARD - G. CLÉAUD G2012/06 P. AUBERT - M. BACHELET Oil price: the nature of the shocks and the impact aggregates G2011/06 P. CHARNOZ - É. COUDIN - M. GAINI Disparités de montant de pension et on the French economy redistribution dans le système de retraite français G2014/13 H. FRAISSE - F. KRAMARZ - C. PROST Wage inequalities in France 1976-2004: Labor Disputes and Job Flows a quantile regression analysis G2013/10 G. LAME G2012/07 R. AEBERHARDT - P GIVORD - C. MARBOT Was there a « Greenspan Conundrum » in the Spillover Effect of the Minimum Wage in France: Euro area? An Unconditional Quantile Regression Approach xi

G2014/14 P. GIVORD - C. GRISLAIN-LETRÉMY - H. NAEGELE How does fuel taxation impact new car purchases? An evaluation using French consumer-level dataset G2014/15 P. AUBERT - S. RABATÉ Durée passée en carrière et durée de vie en retraite : quel partage des gains d'espérance de vie ? G2015/01 A. POISSONNIER The walking dead Euler equation Addressing a challenge to monetary policy models G2015/02 Y. DUBOIS - A. MARINO Indicateurs de rendement du système de retraite français G2015/03 T. MAYER - C. TREVIEN The impacts of Urban Public Transportation: Evidence from the Paris Region