Econ792 Reading 2020.Pdf
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Download (743Kb)
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2018, 10(2): 234–256 https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20150365 Education and Mortality: Evidence from a Social Experiment† By Costas Meghir, Mårten Palme, and Emilia Simeonova* We examine the effects on mortality and health due to a major Swedish educational reform that increased the years of compulsory schooling. Using the gradual phase-in of the reform between 1949 and 1962 across municipalities, we estimate insignificant effects of the reform on mortality in the affected cohort. From the confi- dence intervals, we can rule out effects larger than 1–1.4 months of increased life expectancy. We find no significant impacts on mortality for individuals of low socioeconomic status backgrounds, on deaths that are more likely to be affected by behavior, on hospitalizations, and consumption of prescribed drugs. JEL H52, I12, I21, I28 ( ) he strong correlation between socioeconomic status SES and health is one ( ) Tof the most recognized and studied in the social sciences. Economists have pointed at differences in resources, preferences, and knowledge associated with dif- ferent SES groups as possible explanations see, e.g., Grossman 2006 for an over- ( view . However, a causal link between any of these factors and later life health is ) hard to demonstrate, and the relative importance of different contributing factors is far from clear. A series of studies e.g., Lleras-Muney 2005, Oreopoulos 2006, Clark ( and Royer 2013, Lager and Torssander 2012, and summaries in Mazumder 2008 and 2012 , use regional differences in compulsory schooling laws or changes in national ) legislations on compulsory schooling as a source of exogenous variation in edu- cational attainment in order to identify a causal effect of education on health. -
The Econometric Society European Region Aide Mémoire
The Econometric Society European Region Aide M´emoire March 22, 2021 1 European Standing Committee 2 1.1 Responsibilities . .2 1.2 Membership . .2 1.3 Procedures . .4 2 Econometric Society European Meeting (ESEM) 5 2.1 Timing and Format . .5 2.2 Invited Sessions . .6 2.3 Contributed Sessions . .7 2.4 Other Events . .8 3 European Winter Meeting (EWMES) 9 3.1 Scope of the Meeting . .9 3.2 Timing and Format . 10 3.3 Selection Process . 10 4 Appendices 11 4.1 Appendix A: Members of the Standing Committee . 11 4.2 Appendix B: Winter Meetings (since 2014) and Regional Consultants (2009-2013) . 27 4.3 Appendix C: ESEM Locations . 37 4.4 Appendix D: Programme Chairs ESEM & EEA . 38 4.5 Appendix E: Invited Speakers ESEM . 39 4.6 Appendix F: Winners of the ESEM Awards . 43 4.7 Appendix G: Countries in the Region Europe and Other Areas ........... 44 This Aide M´emoire contains a detailed description of the organisation and procedures of the Econometric Society within the European Region. It complements the Rules and Procedures of the Econometric Society. It is maintained and regularly updated by the Secretary of the European Standing Committee in accordance with the policies and decisions of the Committee. The Econometric Society { European Region { Aide Memoire´ 1 European Standing Committee 1.1 Responsibilities 1. The European Standing Committee is responsible for the organisation of the activities of the Econometric Society within the Region Europe and Other Areas.1 It should undertake the consideration of any activities in the Region that promote interaction among those interested in the objectives of the Society, as they are stated in its Constitution. -
Is the Greek Crisis One of Supply Or Demand?
YANNIS M. IOANNIDES Tufts University CHRISTOPHER A. PISSARIDES London School of Economics Is the Greek Crisis One of Supply or Demand? ABSTRACT Greece’s “supply” problems have been present since its acces- sion to the European Union in 1981; the “demand” problems caused by austerity and wage cuts have compounded the structural problems. This paper discusses the severity of the demand contraction, examines product market reforms, many of which have not been implemented, and their potential impact on com- petitiveness and the economy, and labor market reforms, many of which have been implemented but due to their timing have contributed to the collapse of demand. The paper argues in favor of eurozone-wide policies that would help Greece recover and of linking reforms with debt relief. reece joined the European Union (EU) in 1981 largely on politi- Gcal grounds to protect democracy after the malfunctioning political regimes that followed the civil war in 1949 and the disastrous military dictatorship of the years 1967–74. Not much attention was paid to the economy and its ability to withstand competition from economically more advanced European nations. A similar blind eye was turned to the economy when the country applied for membership in the euro area in 1999, becom- ing a full member in 2001. It is now blatantly obvious that the country was not in a position to compete and prosper in the European Union’s single market or in the euro area. A myriad of restrictions on free trade had been introduced piecemeal after 1949, with the pretext of protecting those who fought for democracy. -
Income Inequality and the Labour Market in Britain and the US
Journal of Public Economics 162 (2018) 48–62 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Public Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jpube Income inequality and the labour market in Britain and the US Richard Blundell a,⁎, Robert Joyce b, Agnes Norris Keiller a, James P. Ziliak c a University College London, Institute for Fiscal Studies, United Kingdom b Institute for Fiscal Studies, United Kingdom c University of Kentucky, Institute for Fiscal Studies, United States article info abstract Article history: We study household income inequality in both Great Britain and the United States and the interplay between la- Received 31 October 2017 bour market earnings and the tax system. While both Britain and the US have witnessed secular increases in 90/ Received in revised form 15 March 2018 10 male earnings inequality over the last three decades, this measure of inequality in net family income has de- Accepted 2 April 2018 clined in Britain while it has risen in the US. To better understand these comparisons, we examine the interaction Available online 23 April 2018 between labour market earnings in the family, assortative mating, the tax and welfare-benefit system and house- hold income inequality. We find that both countries have witnessed sizeable changes in employment which have Keywords: Inequality primarily occurred on the extensive margin in the US and on the intensive margin in Britain. Increases in the gen- Family income erosity of the welfare system in Britain played a key role in equalizing net income growth across the wage distri- Earnings bution, whereas the relatively weak safety net available to non-workers in the US mean this growing group has seen particularly adverse developments in their net incomes. -
2005 Mincer Award
Mincer Award Winners 2005: Orley Ashenfelter is one of the two winners of the 2005 Society of Labor Economists’ Jacob Mincer prize honoring lifetime achievements in the field of labor economics. Over the course of a distinguished career, Orley Ashenfelter has had tremendous influence on the development of modern labor economics. His early work on trade unions brought neoclassical economics to bear on a subject that had been the domain of traditional institutionally-oriented industrial relations specialists. As labor supply emerged as one of the most important subjects in the new field, Ashenfelter showed (in work with James Heckman) that neoclassical theory could be applied to decision making within the family. In his Frisch-prize winning 1980 article, Ashenfelter developed a theoretical and empirical framework for distinguishing between voluntary and involuntary unemployment. Orley was also involved in the income maintenance experiments, the first large-scale social experiments. In 1972 Orley served as Director of the Office of Evaluation of the U.S. Dept. of Labor and became deeply interested in the problem of program evaluation. This focus led him to emphasize developing credible and transparent sources of identification through strategies such as the collection of new data, difference-in-difference designs, and exploiting “natural experiments.” In the 1990s, Orley turned to measuring the returns to education. In a series of studies using new data on twins, Ashenfelter (with Alan Kreuger and Cecilia Rouse) suggested that OLS estimates of the returns to schooling were biased downward to a significant degree. Orley has also had a significant impact on the development of empirical law and economics in recent years. -
Front Matter
Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-69209-0 - Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications, Ninth World Congress - Volume II Edited by Richard Blundell, Whitney K. Newey and Torsten Persson Frontmatter More information Advances in Economics and Econometrics This is the second of three volumes containing edited versions of papers and a commentary presented at invited symposium sessions of the Ninth World Congress of the Econometric Society, held in London in August 2005. The papers summarize and interpret key developments, and they discuss future directions for a wide variety of topics in economics and econometrics. The papers cover both theory and applications. Written by leading specialists in their fields, these volumes provide a unique survey of progress in the discipline. Richard Blundell, CBE FBA, holds the David Ricardo Chair in Political Economy at University College London and is Research Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, London. He is also Director of the Economic and Social Research Council’s Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy. Professor Blundell serves as President of the Econometric Society for 2006. Whitney K. Newey is Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A 2000–01 Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Palo Alto, he is associate editor of Econometrica and the Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, and he formerly served as associate editor of Econometric Theory. Torsten Persson is Professor and Director of the Institute for International Economic Studies at Stockholm University and Centennial Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics. -
Income Inequality and the Labour Market in Britain and the US
UKCPR Discussion Paper Series University of Kentucky Center for DP 2017-07 Poverty Research ISSN: 1936-9379 Income inequality and the labour market in Britain and the US Richard Blundell University College London Institute for Fiscal Studies Robert Joyce Institute for Fiscal Studies Agnes Norris Keiller Institute for Fiscal Studies University College London James P. Ziliak University of Kentucky October 2017 Preferred citation Blundell, R., et al. (2017, Oct.). Income inequality and the labour market in Britain and the US. University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research Discussion Paper Series, DP2017-07. Re- trieved [Date] from http://www.cpr.uky.edu/research. Author correspondence Richard Blundell, [email protected] University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research, 550 South Limestone, 234 Gatton Building, Lexington, KY, 40506-0034 Phone: 859-257-7641. E-mail: [email protected] www.ukcpr.org EO/AA Income Inequality and the Labour Market in Britain and the US1 Richard Blundell2, Robert Joyce3, Agnes Norris Keiller4, and James P. Ziliak5 October 2017 Abstract We study household income inequality in both Great Britain and the United States and the interplay between labour market earnings and the tax system. While both Britain and the US have witnessed secular increases in 90/10 male earnings inequality over the last three decades, this measure of inequality in net family income has declined in Britain while it has risen in the US. We study the interplay between labour market earnings in the family, assortative mating, the tax and benefit system and household income inequality. We find that both countries have witnessed sizeable changes in employment which have primarily occurred on the extensive margin in the US and on the intensive margin in Britain. -
Parent Engagement Ca...Oddlers' Skills Development
2/19/2020 Not just for play: parent engagement can boost toddlers’ skills development | YaleNews YaleNews Not just for play: parent engagement can boost toddlers’ skills development By Lisa Qian 14, 2020 A study involving low-income families in central Colombia found that toddlers whose parents engaged them in play with books and toys made of discarded household materials showed significant improvements in their cognitive and socio- emotional skills Encouraging low-income families to stimulate their toddlers with play and involve them in household activities can improve the children's cognitive and socio-emotional skills development, Yale researchers found in a new study of an early-childhood intervention designed for families in central Colombia. The study, published last month in the American Economic Review (https://www.aeaweb.org/articles? id=10.1257/aer.20150183&within%5Btitle%5D=on&within%5Babstract%5D=on&within%5Bauthor%5D=on&journal=1&q=parental+&from=j) , is one of the first to develop a model for understanding how early childhood interventions among the poor change parental behavior and thus affect the cognitive development of their children. “What the results emphasize is that shifting parental behavior towards more engagement with the child is very important for children in low-income environments,” said Yale economist Costas Meghir https://news.yale.edu/2020/02/14/not-just-play-parent-engagement-can-boost-toddlers-skills-development 1/3 2/19/2020 Not just for play: parent engagement can boost toddlers’ skills development | YaleNews (https://economics.yale.edu/people/faculty/costas-meghir) , a co-author of the paper. He noted that the fundamental aim of the research is to identify ways to prevent poverty from being passed down from one generation to the next by ensuring children develop to their full potential. -
Learning, Career Paths, and the Distribution of Wages†
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 2019, 11(1): 49–88 https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.20170390 Learning, Career Paths, and the Distribution of Wages† By Santiago Caicedo, Robert E. Lucas Jr., and Esteban Rossi-Hansberg* We develop a theory of career paths and earnings where agents organize in production hierarchies. Agents climb these hierarchies as they learn stochastically from others. Earnings grow as agents acquire knowledge and occupy positions with more subordinates. We contrast these and other implications with US census data for the period 1990 to 2010, matching the Lorenz curve of earnings and the observed mean experience-earnings profiles. We show the increase in wage inequality over this period can be rationalized with a shift in the level of the complexity and profitability of technologies relative to the distribution of knowledge in the population. JEL D83, E24, J24, J31 ( ) his paper develops a new model of an economy that generates sustained pro- Tductivity growth. One distinctive feature of the model is that all knowledge in the economy is held by the individual people who comprise it: there is no abstract technology hovering above them in the ether. A second feature, necessarily involv- ing heterogeneous labor, is a kind of complementarity in production involving peo- ple with different skill levels: the marginal product of any one person is contingent on the people he works with. A third feature, closely related to the second, is that improvements over time in individual skill levels depend on imitation or stimulation or inspiration from other people in the economy. All growth is taken to arise from this force. -
Technical Paper Series Congressional Budget Office Washington, DC
Technical Paper Series Congressional Budget Office Washington, DC MODELING LONG-RUN ECONOMIC GROWTH Robert W. Arnold Congressional Budget Office Washington, D.C. 20515 [email protected] June 2003 2003-4 Technical papers in this series are preliminary and are circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. These papers are not subject to CBO’s formal review and editing processes. The analysis and conclusions expressed in them are those of the author and should not be interpreted as those of the Congressional Budget Office. References in publications should be cleared with the author. Papers in this series can be obtained from www.cbo.gov. Abstract This paper reviews the recent empirical literature on long-run growth to determine what factors influence growth in total factor productivity (TFP) and whether there are any channels of influence that should be added to standard models of long-run growth. Factors affecting productivity fall into three general categories: physical capital, human capital, and innovation (including other factors that might influence TFP growth). Recent empirical evidence provides little support for the idea that there are extra-normal returns to physical capital accumulation, nor is there solid justification for adding a separate channel of influence from capital to TFP growth. The paper finds evidence that human capital—as distinct from labor hours worked—is an important factor for growth but also that there is not yet a consensus about exactly how it should enter the model. Some argue that human capital should enter as a factor of production, while others argue that it merely spurs innovation. The forces governing TFP growth are not well understood, but there is evidence that R&D spending is a significant contributor and that its benefit to society may exceed its benefit to the company doing the spending—that is, it is a source of spillovers. -
PROFESSOR SIR RICHARD BLUNDELL CBE FBA Curriculum Vitae (March 2019)
PROFESSOR SIR RICHARD BLUNDELL CBE FBA Curriculum Vitae (March 2019) Ricardo Professor of Political Economy Director Department of Economics ESRC Centre for the Micro-Economic Analysis University College London of Public Policy (CPP@IFS) Gower Street Institute for Fiscal Studies London WC1E 6BT, UK 7 Ridgmout Street e-mail: [email protected] London WC1E 7AE Tel: +44 (0)207679 5863 Tel: +44 (0)20 7291 4820 Mobile: +44 (0)7795334639 Fax: +44 (0)20 7323 4780 Website: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctp39a/ Date of Birth: 1 May 1952 Education and Employment: 1970 - 1973 B.Sc. University of Bristol. (Economics with Statistics, First Class). 1973 - 1975 M.Sc. London School of Economics (Econometrics and Math Econ). 1975-1984 Lecturer in Econometrics, University of Manchester. 1984- Ricardo Chair of Political Economy, University College London, (1988-1992 Dept. Chair). 1986 - 2016 Research Director, Institute for Fiscal Studies. 1991- Director: ESRC Centre for the Micro-Economic Analysis of Public Policy, IFS. 2017- Associate Faculty Member, TSE, Toulouse 1999- IZA Research Fellow 2006- CEPR Research Fellow 1980 Visiting Professor, University of British Columbia. 1993 Visiting Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1994 Ford Visiting Professor, University of California at Berkeley. 1999 Visiting Professor, University of California at Berkeley. Honorary Doctorates Doktors der Wirtschaftswissenschaften ehrenhalber, University of St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland 2003 Æresdoktorar, NHH, Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway 2011 Ehrendoktorwürde Ökonomen, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany 2011 Dottorato honoris causa in Scienze economiche, Università della Svizzera italiana, Switzerland 2016 Doctor of Laws honoris causa, University of Bristol, Bristol, 2017 Doctorato Honoris Causa in Economics, University of Venice, Ca’Foscari, Italy, 2018 Presidency of Professional Organizations 2004 President, European Economics Association. -
The Use of Structural Models in Econometrics
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 31, Number 2—Spring 2017—Pages 33–58 The Use of Structural Models in Econometrics Hamish Low and Costas Meghir he aim of this paper is to discuss the role of structural economic models in empirical analysis and policy design. This approach offers some valuable T payoffs, but also imposes some costs. Structural economic models focus on distinguishing clearly between the objec- tive function of the economic agents and their opportunity sets as defined by the economic environment. The key features of such an approach at its best are a tight connection with a theoretical framework alongside a clear link with the data that will allow one to understand how the model is identified. The set of assumptions under which the model inferences are valid should be clear: indeed, the clarity of the assumptions is what gives value to structural models. The central payoff of a structural econometric model is that it allows an empir- ical researcher to go beyond the conclusions of a more conventional empirical study that provides reduced-form causal relationships. Structural models define how outcomes relate to preferences and to relevant factors in the economic envi- ronment, identifying mechanisms that determine outcomes. Beyond this, they ■ Hamish Low is Professor of Economics, Cambridge University, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and Cambridge INET and Research Fellow, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, United Kingdom. Costas Meghir is the Douglas A. Warner III Professor of Economics, Yale Univer- sity, New Haven, Connecticut; International Research Associate, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, United Kingdom; Research Fellow, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn, Germany; and Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts.