Knowledge that Transforms

In a setting of many‐to‐one two‐sided matching with nontransferable utilities, for example, college admissions, we study conditions under which preferences of both sides are identified with data on one single market. Regardless of whether the market is centralized or decentralized, assuming that the observed matching is stable, we show nonparametric identification of preferences of both sides under certain exclusion restrictions. To take our results to the data, we use Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate different estimators, including the ones that are directly constructed from the identification. We find that a parametric Bayesian approach with a Gibbs sampler works well in realistically sized problems. Finally, we illustrate our methodology in decentralized admissions to public and private schools in Chile and conduct a counterfactual analysis of an affirmative action policy.

We study the design of optimal mechanisms when the designer is uncertain both about the form of information held by the agents and also about which equilibrium will be played. The guarantee of a mechanism is its worst performance across all information structures and equilibria. The potential of an information structure is its best performance across all mechanisms and equilibria. We formulate a pair of linear programs, one of which is a lower bound on the maximum guarantee across all mechanisms, and the other of which is an upper bound on the minimum potential across all information structures. In applications to public expenditure, bilateral trade, and optimal auctions, we use the bounding programs to characterize guarantee‐maximizing mechanisms and potential‐minimizing information structures and show that the max guarantee is equal to the min potential.

This paper introduces and analyzes sequentially stable outcomes in extensive‐form games. An outcome ω is sequentially stable if, for any ε > 0 and any small enough perturbation of the players' behavior, there is an ε ‐perturbation of the players' payoffs and a corresponding equilibrium with outcome close to ω . Sequentially stable outcomes exist for all finite games and are outcomes of sequential equilibria. They are closely related to stable sets of equilibria and satisfy versions of forward induction, iterated strict equilibrium dominance, and invariance to simultaneous moves. In signaling games, sequentially stable outcomes pass the standard selection criteria, and when payoffs are generic, they coincide with outcomes of stable sets of equilibria.

We introduce Cautious Utility, a new model based on the idea that individuals are unsure of trade‐offs between goods and apply caution. The model yields an endowment effect, even when gains and losses are treated symmetrically. Moreover, it implies either loss aversion or loss neutrality for risk, but in a way unrelated to the endowment effect, and it captures the certainty effect, providing a novel unified explanation of all three phenomena. Cautious Utility can help organize empirical evidence, including some that directly contradicts leading alternatives.

We ask how fiscal deficits are financed in environments with two key features: (i) nominal rigidity, and (ii) a violation of Ricardian equivalence due to finite lives or liquidity constraints. In such environments, deficits can contribute to their own financing through two channels: a boom in real economic activity, which expands the tax base; and a surge in inflation, which erodes the real value of nominal government debt. Our main theoretical result establishes that this mechanism becomes more potent as fiscal adjustment is delayed, leading to full self‐financing in the limit: if the monetary authority does not lean too heavily against the fiscal stimulus, then the government can run a deficit today, refrain from tax hikes or spending cuts in the future, and still see its debt converge back to its initial level. We further demonstrate that a significant degree of self‐financing is achievable when the theory is disciplined by empirical evidence on marginal propensities to consume, nominal rigidities, the monetary policy reaction, and the speed of fiscal adjustment.

This paper studies the effect of a restorative justice intervention targeted at 143 youth ages 13 to 17 facing felony charges of medium severity (e.g., burglary, assault). Eligible youths were randomly assigned to participate in the Make‐it‐Right (MIR) restorative justice program or a control group where they faced standard criminal prosecution. We estimate the effects of MIR on the likelihood that a youth will be rearrested in the four years following randomization. Assignment to MIR reduces the probability of a rearrest within six months by 19 percentage points, a 44 percent reduction relative to the control group. Moreover, the reduction in recidivism persists even four years after randomization. Thus, our estimates show that restorative justice conferencing can reduce recidivism among youth charged with relatively serious offenses and can be an effective alternative to traditional criminal justice practices.

We study a flexible class of trade models with international production networks and arbitrary wedge‐like distortions like markups, tariffs, or nominal rigidities. We characterize the general equilibrium response of variables to shocks in terms of microeconomic statistics. Our results are useful for decomposing the sources of real GDP and welfare growth, and for computing counterfactuals. Using the same set of microeconomic sufficient statistics, we also characterize societal losses from increases in tariffs and iceberg trade costs and dissect the qualitative and quantitative importance of accounting for disaggregated details. Our results, which can be used to compute approximate and exact counterfactuals, provide an analytical toolbox for studying large‐scale trade models and help to bridge the gap between computation and theory.

We exploit a natural experiment involving a randomization of votes across parties within coalitions in all local elections in Italy for over a decade. A lottery on the position of party symbols in the ballot papers allows estimating the causal effect of increasing votes to parties for coalition policies. A non‐marginal random boost of votes shifts budgetary spending towards the treated party's platform, but only for issues that are salient in that party's political manifesto. We study the chains of mechanisms mapping votes into policies and link it to an increase in bargaining power within legislative majorities. Parties leverage their higher electoral support to gain the appointment of politically affiliated cabinet members. Empowering different parties also leads to the selection of cabinets with different socio‐demographic characteristics. The unintentional experiment helps shed new light on mechanisms mapping votes to parties into coalition policies.

Measuring the effect of peers on individuals' outcomes is a challenging problem, in part because individuals often select peers who are similar in both observable and unobservable ways. Group formation experiments avoid this problem by randomly assigning individuals to groups and observing their responses; for example, do first‐year students have better grades when they are randomly assigned roommates who have stronger academic backgrounds? In this paper, we propose randomization‐based permutation tests for group formation experiments, extending classical Fisher Randomization Tests to this setting. The proposed tests are justified by the randomization itself, require relatively few assumptions, and are exact in finite samples. This approach can also complement existing strategies, such as linear‐in‐means models, by using a regression coefficient as the test statistic. We apply the proposed tests to two recent group formation experiments.