The welfare state is not merely a stand-in for missing markets; it can do a whole lot more. When generations overlap and the young must borrow to make educational investments, a dynamically-efficient welfare state, by taxing the middle-aged and offering a compensatory old-age pension, can generate higher long-run human capital and welfare compared to laissez faire. Along the transition, no generation is hurt and some are better off. If an intergenerational human capital externality is present, unfunded pensions can be gradually phased out entirely. Public pension reform can be rationalized on efficiency grounds without relying on political-economy concerns or aging.
This paper studies labour market policy in a society where differently gifted individuals can invest in training to further increase their labour market productivity and where the government seeks both effiency and equity. Frictions in the matching process create unemployment and differently skilled workers face different unemployment risks. We show that in such an environment, training programmes that are targeted to the unemployed complement passive transfers (UI benefits), unlike a general training subsidy. Combining passive subsidies with a training subsidy conditioned on the individual being unemployed (for a while) - the typical Active Labour Market Programme - implies a favorable trade-off between equity and efficiency which encourages high spending on training.
We present a theory of identity politics that builds on two ideas. First, voters identify with the social group whose interests are closest to theirs and that features the strongest policy conflict with outgroups. Second, identification causes voters to slant their beliefs of self and others toward group stereotypes. The theory yields two main implications: i) voters' beliefs are polarized along the distinctive features of salient groups; ii) economic shocks that render new groups salient bring about large and non standard changes in beliefs and policies across many issues. In particular, exposure to globalization or cultural changes may induce voters to switch identities, dampening their demand for redistribution and exacerbating conflicts in other social dimensions. We show that survey evidence is broadly consistent with these implications.
Welche Bedeutung hat eine Lockerung der Kontaktbeschränkungen für die Erholung der deutschen Wirtschaft, und welche Schlussfolgerungen für das angemessene Niveau der Kontaktbeschränkungen sind in den kommenden Monaten zu ziehen? Um diese Fragen zu beantworten, wird abgeschätzt, welche Bedeutung die Maßnahmen zur Kontaktbeschränkung, die von Bund und Ländern seit Mitte März 2020 auf den Weg gebracht worden sind, für den derzeit zu beobachtenden Einbruch der Wirtschaftsaktivität in Deutschland tatsächlich haben. Zudem werden die verschiedenen plausiblen Szenarien zur Infektionsverbreitung und -eindämmung unter verschiedenen Optionen zur Lockerung der Kontaktbeschränkungen dargestellt. ; How important is the relaxation of contact restrictions for the recovery of the German economy and what conclusions can be drawn for the appropriate level of contact restrictions in the coming months? In considering these issues, an attempt will be made to assess what significance the contact restriction measures introduced by the federal and state governments since mid-March 2020 will actually have for the current slump in economic activity in Germany. In addition, the various plausible scenarios for the spread and containment of infection are presented with different options for easing contact restrictions.
30 Jahre nach der Deutschen Wiedervereinigung – und unter dem Eindruck der akuten Corona-Krise – fand der siebte New Paradigm Workshop des Forum New Economy zur Zukunft des deutschen Modells vom 28. bis 30. September in Berlin statt. Renommierte deutsche und internationale Experten diskutierten die "Zukunft des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells". Wie gut ist Deutschland noch auf die kommenden Herausforderungen vorbereitet? In diesem Zeitgespräch sollen die auf dem Workshop präsentierten Studien vorgestellt werden, die mit Unterstützung des Forum New Economy erstellten wurden, unter anderem zur Entwicklung der Ungleichheit in Deutschland, einer neuen Industriepolitik, der Relevanz fiskalpolitischer Regeln und den Tücken des deutschen Exportmodells. Ergänzt werden diese Beiträge durch eine Übersetzung des Konferenzbeitrags von Thomas Piketty. ; Thirty years after German reunification – and under distress due to the acute coronavirus crisis – the seventh New Paradigm Workshop of the Forum New Economy took place in Berlin on 28-30 September. Renowned German and international experts discussed the "Future of the German Economic Model". How well is Germany prepared for the coming challenges? This forum features a selection of articles funded by the Forum New Economy and presented at its workshop, including studies on the development of inequality in Germany, new industrial policy, the relevance of fiscal rules and the pitfalls of the German export model. The forum also includes a translation of the keynote by Thomas Piketty.
30 Jahre nach der Deutschen Wiedervereinigung – und unter dem Eindruck der akuten Corona-Krise – fand der siebte New Paradigm Workshop des Forum New Economy zur Zukunft des deutschen Modells vom 28. bis 30. September in Berlin statt. Renommierte deutsche und internationale Experten diskutierten die "Zukunft des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells". Wie gut ist Deutschland noch auf die kommenden Herausforderungen vorbereitet? In diesem Zeitgespräch sollen die auf dem Workshop präsentierten Studien vorgestellt werden, die mit Unterstützung des Forum New Economy erstellten wurden, unter anderem zur Entwicklung der Ungleichheit in Deutschland, einer neuen Industriepolitik, der Relevanz fiskalpolitischer Regeln und den Tücken des deutschen Exportmodells. Ergänzt werden diese Beiträge durch eine Übersetzung des Konferenzbeitrags von Thomas Piketty. ; Thirty years after German reunification – and under distress due to the acute coronavirus crisis – the seventh New Paradigm Workshop of the Forum New Economy took place in Berlin on 28-30 September. Renowned German and international experts discussed the "Future of the German Economic Model". How well is Germany prepared for the coming challenges? This forum features a selection of articles funded by the Forum New Economy and presented at its workshop, including studies on the development of inequality in Germany, new industrial policy, the relevance of fiscal rules and the pitfalls of the German export model. The forum also includes a translation of the keynote by Thomas Piketty.
30 Jahre nach der Deutschen Wiedervereinigung – und unter dem Eindruck der akuten Corona-Krise – fand der siebte New Paradigm Workshop des Forum New Economy zur Zukunft des deutschen Modells vom 28. bis 30. September in Berlin statt. Renommierte deutsche und internationale Experten diskutierten die "Zukunft des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells". Wie gut ist Deutschland noch auf die kommenden Herausforderungen vorbereitet? In diesem Zeitgespräch sollen die auf dem Workshop präsentierten Studien vorgestellt werden, die mit Unterstützung des Forum New Economy erstellten wurden, unter anderem zur Entwicklung der Ungleichheit in Deutschland, einer neuen Industriepolitik, der Relevanz fiskalpolitischer Regeln und den Tücken des deutschen Exportmodells. Ergänzt werden diese Beiträge durch eine Übersetzung des Konferenzbeitrags von Thomas Piketty. ; Thirty years after German reunification – and under distress due to the acute coronavirus crisis – the seventh New Paradigm Workshop of the Forum New Economy took place in Berlin on 28-30 September. Renowned German and international experts discussed the "Future of the German Economic Model". How well is Germany prepared for the coming challenges? This forum features a selection of articles funded by the Forum New Economy and presented at its workshop, including studies on the development of inequality in Germany, new industrial policy, the relevance of fiscal rules and the pitfalls of the German export model. The forum also includes a translation of the keynote by Thomas Piketty.
30 Jahre nach der Deutschen Wiedervereinigung – und unter dem Eindruck der akuten Corona-Krise – fand der siebte New Paradigm Workshop des Forum New Economy zur Zukunft des deutschen Modells vom 28. bis 30. September in Berlin statt. Renommierte deutsche und internationale Experten diskutierten die "Zukunft des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells". Wie gut ist Deutschland noch auf die kommenden Herausforderungen vorbereitet? In diesem Zeitgespräch sollen die auf dem Workshop präsentierten Studien vorgestellt werden, die mit Unterstützung des Forum New Economy erstellten wurden, unter anderem zur Entwicklung der Ungleichheit in Deutschland, einer neuen Industriepolitik, der Relevanz fiskalpolitischer Regeln und den Tücken des deutschen Exportmodells. Ergänzt werden diese Beiträge durch eine Übersetzung des Konferenzbeitrags von Thomas Piketty. ; Thirty years after German reunification – and under distress due to the acute coronavirus crisis – the seventh New Paradigm Workshop of the Forum New Economy took place in Berlin on 28-30 September. Renowned German and international experts discussed the "Future of the German Economic Model". How well is Germany prepared for the coming challenges? This forum features a selection of articles funded by the Forum New Economy and presented at its workshop, including studies on the development of inequality in Germany, new industrial policy, the relevance of fiscal rules and the pitfalls of the German export model. The forum also includes a translation of the keynote by Thomas Piketty.
30 Jahre nach der Deutschen Wiedervereinigung – und unter dem Eindruck der akuten Corona-Krise – fand der siebte New Paradigm Workshop des Forum New Economy zur Zukunft des deutschen Modells vom 28. bis 30. September in Berlin statt. Renommierte deutsche und internationale Experten diskutierten die "Zukunft des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells". Wie gut ist Deutschland noch auf die kommenden Herausforderungen vorbereitet? In diesem Zeitgespräch sollen die auf dem Workshop präsentierten Studien vorgestellt werden, die mit Unterstützung des Forum New Economy erstellten wurden, unter anderem zur Entwicklung der Ungleichheit in Deutschland, einer neuen Industriepolitik, der Relevanz fiskalpolitischer Regeln und den Tücken des deutschen Exportmodells. Ergänzt werden diese Beiträge durch eine Übersetzung des Konferenzbeitrags von Thomas Piketty. ; Thirty years after German reunification – and under distress due to the acute coronavirus crisis – the seventh New Paradigm Workshop of the Forum New Economy took place in Berlin on 28-30 September. Renowned German and international experts discussed the "Future of the German Economic Model". How well is Germany prepared for the coming challenges? This forum features a selection of articles funded by the Forum New Economy and presented at its workshop, including studies on the development of inequality in Germany, new industrial policy, the relevance of fiscal rules and the pitfalls of the German export model. The forum also includes a translation of the keynote by Thomas Piketty.
The formation of party preferences is a complex and not yet fully understood process based on a number of factors. This process, which is of great interest for both social and political science, is usually studied using questionnaire data which has proven to be a very reliable yet often costly and limited approach. Advances in technology and the rise of the internet as a primary information source for many people have created a new approach to keep track of people s interests. The major gateways to the internet s information are the so-called search engines, and Google, arguably the most commonly used search engine, allows scientists to tap the vast source of information generated by its users search queries. In this paper we describe how this data source can be used to estimate the effect of different issues on party preferences using German voters and the German party system as an example. We find that using data provided by Google Trends can lead to a variety of interesting and occasionally counterintuitive insights into peoples party preferences.
Over the last decades, the United States has become increasingly integrated in the world economy. Very low trade barriers and comparatively liberal migration policies have made these developments possible. What drove US congressmen to support the recent wave of globalization? While much of the literature has emphasized the differences that exist between the political economy of trade and migration, in this paper we find that important similarities should not be overlooked. In particular, our analysis of congressional voting between 1970 and 2006 suggests that economic drivers that work through the labor market play an important role in shaping representatives' behavior on both types of policies. Representatives from more skilled-labor abundant districts are more likely to support both trade liberalization and a more open stance vis-a-vis unskilled immigration. Still, important systematic differences exist: welfare state considerations and network effects have an impact on the support for immigration liberalization, but not for trade; Democratic lawmakers are systematically more likely to support a more open migration stance than their Republican counterparts, and the opposite is true for trade liberalization.
The presidential politics literature depicts presidents either as all-powerful actors or figureheads and seeks to explain outcomes accordingly. The president and the executive branch are nonetheless usually treated as black boxes, particularly in developing countries, even though the presidency has evolved into an extremely complex branch of government. While these developments have been studied in the United States, far less is known in other countries, particularly in Latin America, where presidential systems have been considered the source of all goods and evils. To help close the knowledge gap and explore differences in policymaking characteristics not only between Latin America and the US but also across Latin American countries, this paper summarizes the vast literature on the organization and resources of the Executive Branch in the Americas and sets a research agenda for the study of Latin American presidencies.
This article investigates the impact of societal structure on behavior in competitions that can be modeled as all-pay auctions with identity-dependent externalities. The consideration of identity-dependent externalities, which naturally arise in the most common applications of all-pay auctions, enables us to define players' individual characteristics in society (in particular radicalism and centrism) not only for arrangements on the line but more generally. We ?nd that even with a high ratio of centrists in comparison to radicals extremism, characterised by higher expenditure by radicals in comparison to centrists, persists. Moreover, for environments with two radical players we show that there exists a symmetric equilibrium in which all moderates bid zero with certainty. This equilibrium is the unique symmetric equilibrium if there is only a single centrist player. Our results suggest that the active participation of centrists in equilibrium remains characteristic for lottery success functions in the presence of identity-dependent externalities, and therefore that the chosen contest success function was crucial for predictions about extremism and moderation that can be found in the political economy literature.
Increased integration of labour and capital markets creates significant challenges for the welfare states of modern Europe. Taxation of capital and labour that finances extensive programs of cash and in-kind redistribution creates incentives for capital owners and workers to locate in regions where they obtain favorable fiscal treatment. Competition among countries for mobile resources constrains their ability to alter the distribution of income and may lead to reductions in the size and scope of redistributive policies. Mobility of labour and capital is imperfect, however. Recent trends indicate that labour and capital are neither perfectly mobile nor perfectly immobile, but rather adjust gradually to market conditions and economic policies. This paper presents an explicitly dynamic analysis showing that governments can achieve some redistribution when it is costly for factors of production to relocate. As the costs of factor mobility fall, however, the effectiveness of redistributive policies is more limited, and governments have weaker incentives to pursue them. Liberalised immigration policies, EU enlargement, and other steps that promote integration of the factors markets of Western Europe with those of surrounding regions thus present a challenge to policymakers if they also wish to maintain fiscal systems with extensive redistribution.
Institutions that potentially have a positive impact on economic performance rarely exist outside of a system of institutions; rather they are embedded in the economic order of a country. It is thus imperative to investigate bundles of performance-enhancing institutions, particularly those bundles that form the basis for economic orders. This paper is based on bundles of institutions that have empirically proven to be prosperity enhancing. It proposes a measurement of this bundle of institutions in the form of a composite index, which is based on 12 different data series. Index data is available for 163 countries between 2005 and 2010 and it allows for comparative analyses using the overall index as well as its three sub-indices, measuring political, economic and societal institutional quality. The index is a step towards a more systematic international comparison of institutional settings. In future research, it can contribute to identifying prosperity enhancing bundles of institutions through regression analysis.
