When Should There Be Vertical Choice in Health Insurance Markets?

We study the welfare effects of offering choice over coverage levels—“vertical choice”—in regulated health insurance markets. We emphasize that heterogeneity in efficient coverage level is not sufficient to motivate choice. When premiums cannot reflect individuals’ costs, it may not be in consumers’ best interest to select their efficient coverage level. We show that vertical choice is efficient only if consumers with higher willingness to pay have a higher efficient level of coverage. We investigate this condition empirically and find that as long as a minimum coverage level can be enforced, the welfare gains from vertical choice are either zero or economically small. (JEL D82, G22, H75, I13, I21)

Measuring the Welfare Effects of Shame and Pride

Public recognition is frequently used to motivate desirable behavior, yet its welfare effects—such as costs of shame or gains from pride— are rarely measured. We develop a portable empirical methodology for measuring and monetizing social image utility, and we deploy it in experiments on exercise and charitable behavior. In all experiments, public recognition motivates desirable behavior but creates highly unequal image payoffs. High-performing individuals enjoy significant utility gains, while low-performing individuals incur significant utility losses. We estimate structural models of social signaling, and we use the models to explore the social efficiency of public recognition policies. (JEL C93, D64, D82, D91)

How preferences shape the welfare and employment effects of trade

We set up a trade model with two countries, two sectors, and one production factor, which features a home-market effect due to the existence of trade costs. We consider search frictions and firm-level wage bargaining in the sector producing differentiated goods and a perfectly competitive labor market in the sector producing a homogeneous good. Consumers have price-independent generalized-linear preferences over the two types of goods, covering homothetic and quasi-homothetic preferences as two limiting cases. Due to the specific functional forms of indirect utility, homothetic preferences lead to risk aversion, while quasi-homothetic preferences lead to risk neutrality in our model. We show that trade between two countries that differ in their population size leads to an expansion of the differentiated goods sector and a contraction of the homogeneous good sector in the larger economy. This induces the larger country to net-export differentiated goods at the cost of a higher economy-wide rate of unemployment in the open economy (with the effects reversed for the smaller country). The welfare effects of trade depend on the preference structure. Looking at the two limiting cases, we show that the larger country is likely to benefit from trade if preferences are homothetic, whereas losses from trade are possible if preferences are quasi-homothetic. The opposite is true in the smaller country. This reveals an important role of preferences for the welfare effects of trade in the presence of labor market imperfection, a result we further elaborate on by considering more general preferences as well as differences of countries in their per-capita income levels.

The Market for Online Influence

Recent developments in social media have morphed the age-old practice of paying influential individuals for product endorsements into a multibillion dollar industry, extending well beyond celebrity sponsorships. We develop a parsimonious model in which influencers trade off the increased revenue they obtain from paid endorsements with the negative impact that these have on their followers’ engagement and, therefore, on the price influencers receive from marketers. The model provides testable predictions that match suggestive evidence on pricing of paid endorsements, reveals a novel type of inefficiency that emerges in this market, and clarifies the role of search technology and advice transparency in shaping market activity. In particular, we show that recent policies that make paid endorsements more transparent can backfire, whereas an increase in the effectiveness of the search technology that matches followers to influencers has both direct and strategic positive welfare effects. (JEL D83, L82, L86, M31.)

You Win Some, You Lose Some: Compensating the Loss of Green Space in Cities Considering Heterogeneous Population Characteristics

The increased urbanization and human population growth of the recent decades have resulted in the loss of urban green spaces. One policy used to prevent the loss of urban green space is ecological compensation. Ecological compensation is the final step in the mitigation hierarchy; compensation measures should thus be a last resort after all opportunities to implement the earlier steps of the hierarchy have been exhausted. Ecological compensation should balance the ecological damage, aiming for a “no net loss” of biodiversity and ecosystem services. In this study, we develop a simple model that can be used as tool to study the welfare effects of applying ecological compensation when green space is at risk of being exploited, both at an aggregate level for society and for different groups of individuals. Our focus is on urban green space and the value of the ecosystem service—recreation—that urban green space provides. In a case study, we show how the model can be used in the planning process to evaluate the welfare effects of compensation measures at various sites within the city. The results from the case study indicate that factors such as population density and proximity to green space have a large impact on aggregate welfare from green space and on net welfare when different compensation sites are compared against each other.