世界経済・社会統計 = World development indicators

计量经济分析 = Econometric analysis

A Treatise on the Family. G. S. Becker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1981. Gary Becker is one of the most famous and influential economists of the second half of the 20th century, a fervent contributor to and expounder of the University of Chicago free-market philosophy, and winner of the 1992 Nobel Prize in economics. Although any book with the word "treatise" in its title is clearly intended to have an impact, one coming from someone as brilliant and controversial as Becker certainly had such a lofty goal. It has received many article-length reviews in several disciplines (Ben-Porath, 1982; Bergmann, 1995; Foster, 1993; Hannan, 1982), which is one measure of its scholarly importance, and yet its impact is, I think, less than it may have initially appeared, especially for scholars with substantive interests in the family. This book is, its title notwithstanding, more about economics and the economic approach to behavior than about the family. In the first sentence of the preface, Becker writes "In this book, I develop an economic or rational choice approach to the family." Lest anyone accuse him of focusing on traditional (i.e., material) economics topics, such as family income, poverty, and labor supply, he immediately emphasizes that those topics are not his focus. "My intent is more ambitious: to analyze marriage, births, divorce, division of labor in households, prestige, and other non-material behavior with the tools and framework developed for material behavior." Indeed, the book includes chapters on many of these issues. One chapter examines the principles of the efficient division of labor in households, three analyze marriage and divorce, three analyze various child-related issues (fertility and intergenerational mobility), and others focus on broader family issues, such as intrafamily resource allocation. His analysis is not, he believes, constrained by time or place. His intention is "to present a comprehensive analysis that is applicable, at least in part, to families in the past as well as the present, in primitive as well as modern societies, and in Eastern as well as Western cultures." His tone is profoundly conservative and utterly skeptical of any constructive role for government programs. There is a clear sense of how much better things were in the old days of a genderbased division of labor and low market-work rates for married women. Indeed, Becker is ready and able to show in Chapter 2 that such a state of affairs was efficient and induced not by market or societal discrimination (although he allows that it might exist) but by small underlying household productivity differences that arise primarily from what he refers to as "complementarities" between caring for young children while carrying another to term. Most family scholars would probably find that an unconvincingly simple explanation for a profound and complex phenomenon. What, then, is the salient contribution of Treatise on the Family? It is not literally the idea that economics could be applied to the nonmarket sector and to family life because Becker had already established that with considerable success and influence. At its core, microeconomics is simple, characterized by a belief in the importance of prices and markets, the role of self-interested or rational behavior, and, somewhat less centrally, the stability of preferences. It was Becker's singular and invaluable contribution to appreciate that the behaviors potentially amenable to the economic approach were not limited to phenomenon with explicit monetary prices and formal markets. Indeed, during the late 1950s and throughout the 1960s, he did undeniably important and pioneering work extending the domain of economics to such topics as labor market discrimination, fertility, crime, human capital, household production, and the allocation of time. Nor is Becker's contribution the detailed analyses themselves. Many of them are, frankly, odd, idiosyncratic, and off-putting. …

A Treatise on the Family

In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.

Thinking fast and slow.

This paper presents a data set that improves the measurement of educational attainment for a broad group of countries. We extend our previous estimates of educational attainment for the population over age 15 and over age 25 up to 1995 and provide projections for 2000. We discuss the estimation method for the measures of educational attainment and relate our estimates to alternative international measures of human capital stocks.

International Data on Educational Attainment Updates and Implications

We model a consumer's efforts to reduce the discount on future utilities. Our analysis shows how wealth, mortality, addictions, uncertainty, and other variables affect the degree of time preference. In addition to working out many implications of the model, we discuss evidence on consumption, savings, equilibrium, and the dynamics of inequality. We claim that most ofthat evidence is consistent with the predictions of our approach.

The Endogenous Determination of Time Preference

The steady state and transitional dynamics of two-sector models of endogenous growth are analyzed in this paper. We describe necessary conditions for endogenous growth. The conditions allow us to reduce the dynamics of the solution to a system with one state-like and two control-like variables. We analyze the determinants of the long run growth rate. We use the Time-Elimination Method to analyze the transitional dynamics of the models. We find that there are transitions in real time if the point-in-time production possibility frontier is strictly concave, which occurs, for example, if the two production functions are different or if there are decreasing point-in-time returns in any of the sectors. We also show that if the models have a transition in real time, the models are globally saddle path stable. We find that the wealth or consumption smoothing effect tends to dominate the substitution or real wage effect so that the transition from relatively low levels of physical capital is carried over through high work effort rather than high savings. We develop some empirical implications. We show that the models predict conditional convergence in that, in a cross section, the growth rate is predicted to be negatively related to initial income but only after some measure of human capital is held constant. Thus, the models are consistent with existing empirical cross country evidence.

Transitional Dynamics in Two-Sector Models of Endogenous Growth

The steady state and transitional dynamics of two-sector models of endogenous growth are analyzed in this paper We describe necessary conditions for endogenous growth The conditions allow us to reduce the dynamics of the solution to a system with one state-like and two control-like variables We analyze the determinants of the long run growth rate We use the Time-Elimination Method to analyze the transitional dynamics of the models We find that there are transitions in real time if the point-in-time production possibility frontier is strictly concave which occurs for example if the two production functions are different or if there are decreasing point-in-time returns in any of the sectors We also show that if the models have a transition in real time the models are globally saddle path stable We find that the wealth or consumption smoothing effect tends to dominate the substitution or real wage effect so that the transition from relatively low levels of physical capital is carried over through high work effort rather than high savings We develop some empirical implications We show that the models predict conditional convergence in that in a cross section the growth rate is predicted to be negatively related to initial income but only after some measure of human capital is held constant Thus the models are consistent with existing empirical cross country evidence (authors)

/pdf/transitional-dynamics-in-two-sector-models-of-endogenous-2quczqorox.pdf

What determines whether children grow up to be rich or poor? Arguing that parental actions are some of the most important sources of wealth inequality, Casey B. Mulligan investigates the transmission of economic status from one generation to the next by constructing an economic model of parental preferences. In Mulligan's model, parents determine the degree of their altruistic concern for their children and spend time with and resources on them accordingly—just as they might make choices about how they spend money. Mulligan tests his model against both old and new evidence on the intergenerational transmission of consumption, earnings, and wealth, including models that emphasize "financial constraints." One major prediction of Mulligan's model confirmed by the evidence is that children of wealthy parents typically spend more than they earn. Mulligan's innovative approach can also help explain other important behavior, such as charitable giving and "corporate loyalty," and will appeal to a wide range of quantitatively oriented social scientists and sociobiologists.

Parental Priorities and Economic Inequality

How does the source of political leadership affect public policy? Is the public sector run differently when its leaders are elected “fairly”? How, exactly? These questions are important. Nondemocracies are prevalent around the world. According to data from the POLITY IV (2000) project, which provides a widely used dataset on the authority characteristics of modern polities over the last two centuries, nondemocratic regimes ruled the majority of countries, and the majority of the world’s population, until 1991. Even since 1991, more than 40 percent of countries and people were ruled by nondemocratic regimes. Political economy theory devoted to the modeling of democratic institutions might therefore miss much of the world’s public sector activity. A comparison of democracies and nondemocracies may also enhance the understanding of democratic institutions by providing an empirical test of some important implications of formal voting models. We begin this paper by contrasting two schools of thought about determinants of policy: one that emphasizes the role of voting mechanisms in determining policy and a second that argues that democracy and other political mechanisms will be (at most) second-order determinants of policy choices once economic and demographic variables are taken into account. This raises the empirical question: are there many public policies that are significantly different between economically similar democracies and nondemocracies and, if so, which types of policies? Looking across countries and over the years 1960 –1990, we answer negatively when it comes to the economic or social policies. However, we do find differences in another policy arena, namely those relating to

/pdf/do-democracies-have-different-public-policies-than-e231pbnl86.pdf

Casey B. Mulligan

Papers

The Endogenous Determination of Time Preference

Transitional Dynamics in Two-Sector Models of Endogenous Growth

Transitional Dynamics in Two-Sector Models of Endogenous Growth

Parental Priorities and Economic Inequality

Do Democracies Have Different Public Policies than Nondemocracies