<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Rafael</gnm><snm>La Porta</snm><aff>Dartmouth College</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Florencio</gnm><snm>Lopez-de-Silanes</snm><aff>EDHEC Graduate School of Management</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Andrei</gnm><snm>Shleifer</snm><aff>Harvard U</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>285</ppf>
<ppl>332</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>In the last decade, economists have produced a considerable body of research
suggesting
that the historical origin of a country's laws is highly correlated with a
broad range of its legal rules and regulations, as well as with economic outcomes.
We summarize this evidence and attempt a unified interpretation. We also address
several objections to the empirical claim that legal origins matter. Finally, we assess
the implications of this research for economic reform.</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=1&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.285</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Transfers in Cash and In-Kind: Theory Meets the Data</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Janet</gnm><snm>Currie</snm><aff>Columbia U</aff></au>
<au><gnm>Firouz</gnm><snm>Gahvari</snm><aff>U IL</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>333</ppf>
<ppl>83</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>We review theoretical explanations for in-kind transfers in light of the limited empirical
evidence. After reviewing the traditional paternalistic arguments, we consider
explanations based on imperfect information and self-targeting. We then discuss the
large literature on in-kind programs as a way of improving the efficiency of the
tax system and a range of other possible explanations, including the "Samaritan's
Dilemma," pecuniary effects, credit constraints, asymmetric information amongst agents,
and political economy considerations. Our reading of the evidence suggests that
paternalism and interdependent preferences are leading overall explanations for the
existence of in-kind transfer programs but that some of the other arguments may apply
to specific cases. Political economy considerations must also be part of the story.
</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=2&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.333</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Is the U.S. Labor Market Really That Exceptional? A Review of Richard Freeman</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Stephen</gnm><snm>Nickell</snm><aff>Nuffield College, Oxford U</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>384</ppf>
<ppl>95</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>America Works is a splendid book and Richard Freeman is to be congratulated on
producing a work that sets out what is right and what is wrong with the U.S. labor
market while being a joy to read. While I am generally sympathetic to both the analysis
and the conclusions, there are a number of points of disagreement that I highlight
in this review. In particular, I would add to his policy recommendations by taking
a gamble and enacting a law that entitled all employees in the United States to four
weeks paid holiday per year in addition to public holidays. This may transform
summertime in the United States.</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=3&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.384</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>The Enigma of India</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Kaushik</gnm><snm>Basu</snm><aff>Cornell U</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>396</ppf>
<ppl>406</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>India's high growth over the last fifteen years has inspired several recent books and
papers to examine the growth's source and sustainability--the two-volume study by
Arvind Virmani being a case in point. This paper evaluates these recent works. It is
argued that the cause of the take-off does not fit into any easy ideological category as
suggested by Virmani. The current high growth has been achieved in several steps, with
distinct factors of propulsion behind each step. There is reason to expect the growth to
be sustainable, although destabilizing political tensions will arise from the increasing
inequality. The paper also evaluates how India's growth relates to the global economy.</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=4&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.396</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>A Review of David Colander</ti>
<augp>
<au><gnm>Daniel S.</gnm><snm>Hamermesh</snm><aff>U TX</aff></au>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>407</ppf>
<ppl>11</ppl>
</pp>
<ab>David Colander's update/reworking of his 1987 volume draws conclusions about
graduate study in economics from interviews with students in selected leading U.S.
programs. Although not formally statistical, the interviews support the conclusion
that most of the core of graduate instruction (except macro) is handled very well.
Colander's concern about the lack of attention to training teachers is well founded. His
conclusion that fewer idiots savants are being trained than in the 1980s is overly optimistic,
and his worry about stresses that graduate students express is misplaced.</ab>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=5&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.407</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Book Reviews</ti>
<augp>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>412</ppf>
<ppl>50</ppl>
</pp>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=6&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.412</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>Annotated Listing of New Books</ti>
<augp>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>451</ppf>
<ppl>554</ppl>
</pp>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=7&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.451</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


<head>
<pubinfo>
<pubnm>American Economic Association</pubnm>
<publoc>Nashville, TN</publoc>
</pubinfo>
<jrninfo>
<issn>0022-8282</issn>
<jrnti>Journal of Economic Literature</jrnti>
<jrnurl>http://www.aeaweb.org/journal.html</jrnurl>
</jrninfo>
<issinfo>
<vol>46</vol>
<iss>2</iss>
<cd>June 2008</cd>
<iss_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/issue_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&issue_date=June 2008</iss_url>
</issinfo>
<docty>Articles</docty>
<artinfo>
<ti>JEL Classifications</ti>
<augp>
</augp>
<pp>
<ppf>555</ppf>
<ppl>567</ppl>
</pp>
<art_url>http://www.aeaweb.org/articles/article_detail.php?journal=JEL&volume=46&issue=2&article=8&issue_date=June 2008</art_url>
<doi>10.1257/jel.46.2.555</doi>
</artinfo>
</head>


