The 2018 AEJ Best Paper Awards Have Been Announced
The 2018 AEJ Best Paper Awards have been selected. The papers chosen are highlighted below.
AEJ: Applied Economics
In “The Persistent Effect of Temporary Affirmative Action,” author Conrad Miller studies the effect of federal affirmative action regulation on workplace diversity. He finds that its effect is not only large but also highly persistent. Five years after the initial regulation, the black share of employees increased by 0.8 percentage points. It continued to increase at a similar pace for over a decade following deregulation, which Miller attributes to better screening methods for potential hires. (AEJ: Applied Economics, Vol. 9, No. 3, July 2017)
AEJ: Economic Policy
In “Income, the Earned Income Tax Credit, and Infant Health,” authors Hilary Hoynes, Doug Miller, and David Simon evaluate the impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit on infant health outcomes. The EITC provides a tax credit to lower income working families, and the authors demonstrate that it increases average birth weights and decreases the incidence of low birth weights — especially among the newborns of African American mothers. The authors argue that the health benefits of nonhealth programs, such as the EITC, should be taken into account when discussing the U.S. social safety net. (AEJ: Economic Policy Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2015)
In “Gender Gaps and the Rise of the Service Economy,” authors Rachel Ngai and Barbara Petrongolo investigate how the expansion of the service sector narrowed the gender gaps for wages and hours in the US. They say that the shift toward female-dominated service jobs boosted employment options for women in the latter half of the 20th century and freed more women to leave the home, since domestic responsibilities like cleaning and child care could be outsourced to a growing array of professional services. Meanwhile, improved technology reduced men’s advantage in factories by making that work less physically demanding. (AEJ: Macroeconomics Vol. 9, No. 4, October 2017)
In “Collective Self-Control”, Alessandro Lizzeri and Leeat Yariv consider the extent to which government intervention can help constituents overcome self-control problems that might work against their self interest, such as failing to save enough for retirement. They develop a model that abandons the idea of a benevolent planner (i.e. government) and considers how the political process shapes policies. The authors conclude that either full centralization or laissez-faire generate the highest welfare. (AEJ: Microeconomics Vol. 9, No. 3, August 2017)