Search results

AbstractWe provide an overview of the literature investigating (retail) investors' demand for lottery‐like stocks. We summarize different sets of lottery proxies and discuss their implications for cross‐sectional pricing of individual stocks. We present empirical evidence and summarize the findings including (i) the robustness of the lottery demand effect using an extended data set, (ii) the economic underpinnings of the lottery demand effect, and (iii) the explanatory power of the lottery preference factor for established stock market anomalies.

International audience ; The UK National Lottery has been in operation since 1994. An examination of the regional distribution of awards per head of population suggests marked spatial disparities with London doing particularly well and Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and the North East faring much better than other regions. Such disparities also exist at English Local Authority level with funding in London and some major provincial centres doing much better than more rural authorities. Such inequalities may give grounds for concern, given that they appear to replicate those for other types of Government spending. The results of an empirical model designed to explain the spatial distribution of awards suggest that, in addition to a London effect, levels of deprivation have a positive impact. Another important explanatory variable which has a positive impact on lottery funding is the qualifications of residents which might plausibly reflect the quality of lottery bids received from an area. However, once these factors are taken account of, there is little evidence that rural areas fare badly.

The UK National Lottery has been in operation since 1994. An examination of the regional distribution of awards per head of population suggests marked spatial disparities with London doing particularly well and Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and the North East faring much better than other regions. Such disparities also exist at English Local Authority level with funding in London and some major provincial centres doing much better than more rural authorities. Such inequalities may give grounds for concern, given that they appear to replicate those for other types of Government spending. The results of an empirical model designed to explain the spatial distribution of awards suggest that, in addition to a London effect, levels of deprivation have a positive impact. Another important explanatory variable which has a positive impact on lottery funding is the qualifications of residents which might plausibly reflect the quality of lottery bids received from an area. However, once these factors are taken account of, there is little evidence that rural areas fare badly.

This book is about the virtues and social justice of random distribution. The first chapter is a utopian fragment about a future country, Aleatoria, where everything, including political power, jobs and money, is distributed by lottery. The rest of the book is devoted to considering the idea of the lottery in terms of the conventional components and assumptions of theories of justice, and to reviewing the possible applications of lottery distribution in contemporary society.This revised sec

This book is about the virtues and social justice of random distribution. The first chapter is a utopian fragment about a future country, Aleatoria, where everything, including political power, jobs and money, is distributed by lottery. The rest of the book is devoted to considering the idea of the lottery in terms of the conventional components and assumptions of theories of justice, and to reviewing the possible applications of lottery distribution in contemporary society. This revised sec ...

This article compares the 'enfranchisement lottery', a novel method for allocating the right to vote, with universal suffrage. The comparison is conducted exclusively on the basis of the expected consequences of the two systems. Each scheme seems to have a relative advantage. On the one hand, the enfranchisement lottery would create a better informed electorate and thus improve the quality of electoral outcomes. On the other hand, universal suffrage is more likely to ensure that elections are seen to be fair, which is important for political stability. This article concludes that, on balance, universal suffrage is prima facie superior to the enfranchisement lottery. Yet the analysis shows that the instrumental case for the 'one person, one vote' principle is less conclusive than democratic theorists usually suppose.

This article compares the 'enfranchisement lottery', a novel method for allocating the right to vote, with universal suffrage. The comparison is conducted exclusively on the basis of the expected consequences of the two systems. Each scheme seems to have a relative advantage. On the one hand, the enfranchisement lottery would create a better informed electorate and thus improve the quality of electoral outcomes. On the other hand, universal suffrage is more likely to ensure that elections are seen to be fair, which is important for political stability. This article concludes that, on balance, universal suffrage is prima facie superior to the enfranchisement lottery. Yet the analysis shows that the instrumental case for the 'one person, one vote' principle is less conclusive than democratic theorists usually suppose. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

There has been a surge of interest in stochastic assignment mechanisms which proved to be theoretically compelling thanks to their prominent welfare properties. Contrary to stochastic mechanisms, however, lottery mechanisms are commonly used for indivisible good allocation in real-life. To help facilitate the design of practical lottery mechanisms, we provide new tools for obtaining stochastic improvements in lotteries. As applications, we propose lottery mechanisms that improve upon the widely-used random serial dictatorship mechanism and a lottery representation of its competitor, the probabilistic serial mechanism. The tools we provide here can be useful in developing welfare-enhanced new lottery mechanisms for practical applications such as school choice. (author's abstract)