Suchergebnisse

Introduction -- Definitions and scope -- The growing influence of behavioural economics on policy -- Behavioural economics and policy design -- Regulatory delivery -- Conclusions

This paper considers Ireland's banking crisis from the perspective of behavioural economics. It assesses whether known biases in judgement and decision-making were instrumental in the development and severity of the crisis. It investigates evidence that key decision-makers, including consumers, businesspeople, bankers and regulators, as well as parties such as civil servants, politicians, academics and journalists, were influenced by seven specific phenomena which have been identified previously via experiments and field studies. It concludes that evidence is consistent with the influence of these established phenomena. Ireland's long boom, rapid financial integration and lack of relevant past experience may have increased the vulnerability of decision-makers to economic and financial reasoning that proved disadvantageous. The analysis has potential implications for attempts to prevent future crises.

In the absence of longitudinal data, recall data is used to examine participation in sport. Techniques of survival analysis are adapted and applied to illuminate the dynamics of sporting life. The likelihood of participation has a distinct pattern across the life-course, rising to a peak at 15 years of age, falling sharply in late teenage years and more gradually during adulthood. Logistic regressions and Cox regressions reveal strong effects on participation of gender, cohort and socioeconomic status, which vary over the life-course and by type of sport. The findings add significantly to previous work and have implications for policymakers wishing to increase physical activity.

"Cover" -- "Title Page" -- "Contents" -- "Preface" -- "Dedication" -- "1. When and How Can Evidence Inform Policy? Pete Lunn, Frances Ruane" -- "2. Using Evidence to Improve Evaluation Methods for Public Infrastructure Edgar Morgenroth" -- "3. Should Loan-to-Value Ratios be Limited? The International Evidence David Duffy" -- "4. The Potential Role of Pay-for-Performance in Irish Healthcare: Lessons from the International Evidence Anne Nolan, Jacqueline O'Reilly, Samantha Smith, Aoife Brick" -- "5. Learning from the Evidence: Using Educational Research to Inform Policy Emer Smyth, Selina McCoy" -- "6. Boosting Innovation and Productivity in Enterprises: What Matters? What Works? Frances Ruane, Iulia Siedschlag" -- "7. Do Active Labour Market Policies Activate? Elish Kelly, Seamus McGuinness, Philip J. O'Connell" -- "8. Providing Economic Security Through Competition and Regulatory Policy: What Is the Evidence? Paul K. Gorecki" -- "9. Protecting Consumers of Financial Services Pete Lunn" -- "10. Fiscal Consolidation Strategies: Evidence from the International Experience Eddie Casey, Joseph Durkan, David Duffy" -- "11. Evidence on the Pattern of Earnings and Labour Costs Over the Recession Adele Bergin, Elish Kelly, Seamus McGuinness" -- "12. Quality of Public Services: Irish Public Perceptions and Implications for Public Service Reform Dorothy Watson" -- "13. Increasing the Contribution of Evidence to Policy Frances Ruane, Pete Lunn" -- "Acknowledgements" -- "Notes" -- "Copyright" -- "About the Editors

This paper summarises useful evidence from behavioural science for fighting the COVID-19 outbreak. It is based on an extensive literature search of relevant behavioural interventions and studies of crises. The findings aim to be useful not only to government and public authorities, but to organisations, workplaces and households.

This rapid, narrative review summarizes useful evidence from behavioral science for fighting the COVID-19 outbreak. We undertook an extensive, multi-disciplinary literature search covering five issues: handwashing, face touching, self-isolation, public-spirited behavior, and responses to crisis communication. The search identified more than 100 relevant papers. We find effective behavioral interventions to increase handwashing, but not to reduce face touching. Social supports and behavioral plans can reduce the negative psychological effects of isolation, potentially reducing the disincentive to isolate. Public-spirited behavior is more likely with frequent communication of what is ?best for all?, strong group identity, and social disapproval of noncompliance. Effective crisis communication involves speed, honesty, credibility, empathy, and promoting useful individual actions. Risks are probably best communicated through numbers, with ranges to describe uncertainty ? simply stating a maximum may bias public perception. The findings aim to be useful not only for government and public health authorities, but for organizations and communities.

Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to both exacerbate and ameliorate existing socioeconomic inequalities. In this article, we provide a state-of-the-art interdisciplinary overview of the potential impacts of generative AI on (mis)information and three information-intensive domains: work, education, and healthcare. Our goal is to highlight how generative AI could worsen existing inequalities while illuminating how AI may help mitigate pervasive social problems. In the information domain, generative AI can democratize content creation and access but may dramatically expand the production and proliferation of misinformation. In the workplace, it can boost productivity and create new jobs, but the benefits will likely be distributed unevenly. In education, it offers personalized learning, but may widen the digital divide. In healthcare, it might improve diagnostics and accessibility, but could deepen pre-existing inequalities. In each section, we cover a specific topic, evaluate existing research, identify critical gaps, and recommend research directions, including explicit trade-offs that complicate the derivation of a priori hypotheses. We conclude with a section highlighting the role of policymaking to maximize generative AI's potential to reduce inequalities while mitigating its harmful effects. We discuss strengths and weaknesses of existing policy frameworks in the European Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom, observing that each fails to fully confront the socioeconomic challenges we have identified. We propose several concrete policies that could promote shared prosperity through the advancement of generative AI. This article emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary collaborations to understand and address the complex challenges of generative AI.