Knowledge that Transforms

This paper investigates married women’s hours worked disaggregated by the husband’s wage decile. In the United States, this pattern has changed from downward sloping to hump shaped. We show that this development can be explained within a standard household model of labor supply when taking into account trends in assortative mating. A quantitative analysis of our model shows that female wage growth and decreasing fertility are primarily responsible for the overall increase in wives’ hours since the 1970s. The fact that the most pronounced increases are observed for wives married to high-wage men is a result of trends in assortative mating.

This article studies how decentralization of wage bargaining from sector to firm level influences wage levels and wage dispersion. We use detailed panel data covering a period of decentralization in the Danish labor market. The decentralization process provides variation in the individual worker’s wage-setting system that facilitates identification of the effects of decentralization. We find a wage premium associated with firm-level bargaining relative to sector-level bargaining and that the return to skills is higher under the more decentralized wage-setting systems. Using quantile regression, we also find that wages are more dispersed under firm-level bargaining compared to more centralized wage-setting systems.

We develop an equilibrium model of the US labor market, fit to Panel Study of Income Dynamics data from 1968–96. Our main innovation is a finer differentiation of types of labor than in prior work (i.e., by occupation, education, gender, and age). This lets us fit wage and employment patterns better than simpler models. We obtain a good fit to wages and occupational choices over the 29-year period while also explaining college attendance rates. We use the model to assess factors driving changes in the wage structure. Occupational demand shifts and shifts in demand for college labor and female labor within occupations are key factors.

This article reports on household survey measurements of the “offshorability” of jobs, defined as the ability to perform the work from abroad. We develop multiple measures of offshorability, using both self-reporting and professional coders. All measures find that roughly 25% of US jobs are offshorable. Our three preferred measures agree between 70% and 80% of the time. Professional coders appear to provide the most accurate assessments. Empirically, more educated workers appear to hold somewhat more offshorable jobs, and offshorability does not have systematic effects on either wages or the probability of layoff.

The main goal of this article is to provide an answer to the question: does anything forecast exchange rates, and if so, which variables? It is well known that exchange rate fluctuations are very difficult to predict using economic models, and that a random walk forecasts exchange rates better than any economic model (the Meese and Rogoff puzzle). However, the recent literature has identified a series of fundamentals/methodologies that claim to have resolved the puzzle. This article provides a critical review of the recent literature on exchange rate forecasting and illustrates the new methodologies and fundamentals that have been recently proposed in an up-to-date, thorough empirical analysis. Overall, our analysis of the literature and the data suggests that the answer to the question: “Are exchange rates predictable?” is, “It depends”—on the choice of predictor, forecast horizon, sample period, model, and forecast evaluation method. Predictability is most apparent when one or more of the following hold: the predictors are Taylor rule or net foreign assets, the model is linear, and a small number of parameters are estimated. The toughest benchmark is the random walk without drift. (JEL C53, F31, F37, E43, E52)

Julie Berry Cullen of University of California, San Diego reviews, “Taxes in America: What Everyone Needs to Know” by Leonard E. Burman and Joel Slemrod. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Explores how the U.S. tax system works, how it affects people and businesses, and how it might be made better. Discusses the basics of taxes; personal income taxes; business income taxes; taxing spending; other kinds of taxes; taxes and the economy; the hidden welfare state; the burden of taxation; tax administration and enforcement; misperceptions and reality in the policy process; tax myths; and tax reform. Burman is Daniel Patrick Moynihan Professor of Public Affairs in the Maxwell School and is with the Departments of Public Administration and Economics and the Law School at Syracuse University. Slemrod is Paul W. McCracken Collegiate Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy in the Stephen M. Ross School of Business, Director of the Office of Tax Policy Research in the Ross School of Business, and Professor and Chair in the Department of Economics at the University of Michigan.”

The empirical literature on economic growth and development has moved from the study of proximate determinants to the analysis of ever deeper, more fundamental factors, rooted in long-term history. A growing body of new empirical work focuses on the measurement and estimation of the effects of historical variables on contemporary income by explicitly taking into account the ancestral composition of current populations. The evidence suggests that economic development is affected by traits that have been transmitted across generations over the very long run. This article surveys this new literature and provides a framework to discuss different channels through which intergenerationally transmitted characteristics may impact economic development, biologically (via genetic or epigenetic transmission) and culturally (via behavioral or symbolic transmission). An important issue is whether historically transmitted traits have affected development through their direct impact on productivity, or have operated indirectly as barriers to the diffusion of productivity-enhancing innovations across populations. (JEL J11, O33, O47, Z13)

Home bias is a perennial feature of international capital markets. We review various explanations of this puzzling phenomenon highlighting recent developments in macroeconomic modeling that incorporate international portfolio choices in standard two-country general equilibrium models. We refer to this new literature as Open Economy Financial Macroeconomics. We focus on three broad classes of explanations: (i) hedging motives in frictionless financial markets (real exchange rate and nontradable income risk), (ii) asset trade costs in international financial markets (such as transaction costs or differences in tax treatments between national and foreign assets), and (iii) informational frictions and behavioral biases. Recent theories call for new portfolio facts beyond equity home bias. We present new evidence on cross-border asset holdings across different types of assets: equities, bonds and bank lending and new micro data on institutional holdings of equity at the fund level. These data should inform macroeconomic modeling of the open economy and a growing literature of models of delegated investment. (JEL E13, F41, G11, G12, G15)

Harstad and Selten's article in this forum performs a valuable service by highlighting the dominance of optimization-based models over boundedly rational models in modern microeconomics, and questioning whether optimization-based models are a better way forward than boundedly rational models. This article complements Rabin's response to Harstad and Selten, focusing on modeling strategic behavior. I consider Harstad and Selten's examples and proposed boundedly rational models in the light of modern behavioral economics and behavioral game theory, commenting on the challenges that remain and the most promising ways forward. (JEL B40, C72, D01, D03, D80)

Transportation is a vital sector of the U.S. economy based on consumers', firms', and government's enormous expenditures in money and time and on its effect on virtually all other sectors in the economy. I assess the performance of the transportation system and consider how it could be improved by analyzing whether the United States has the optimal mix of public and private provision. The empirical evidence indicates that our hugely important transportation system has been compromised by various government policies and the significant welfare costs motivate either vastly improving public provision or expanding the role of the private sector. (JEL H44, H54, H76, L91, L98, R41, R48)