Grant Category

Market Structure

Are markets becoming less competitive and, if so, why, and what are the larger implications?

The premise of a market economy is that broad-based economic gains come from a well-functioning market. Yet there is evidence that growing economic inequality is undermining our society’s ability to act collectively in pursuit of the nation’s welfare. When stakeholders who comprise economic systems subvert institutions for their own gain, the economy loses. If markets are becoming less competitive, the resulting increase in monopoly power could be contributing to these problems.

New data-driven research provides more evidence that markets are increasingly concentrated and that, in many cases, this is indicative of a reduction in competition. Markups, the traditional measure of monopoly power, are growing. Investment and new business start-ups have been falling steadily even as corporate profits are rising. At the same time, labor income as a share of national income is falling. Does the economy suffer from a monopoly problem and, if so, why, and what are the larger implications?

We are interested in research from an aggregate perspective, which has been common in the macroeconomic and labor literatures, as well as sectoral analysis that has been the focus of industrial organization literatures.

  • The causes of increased concentration
  • Consequences of concentration for productivity, investment, and economic growth
  • Consequences of concentration for labor markets and power

Explore the Grants We've Awarded

Reset

Schedule stability for hourly workers – Phase I of II

Grant Year: 2014

Grant Amount: $40,000

Grant Type: academic

This research will investigate the interaction of business time-scheduling policies and changing family structures. Unpredictable work hours, more common among low-wage workers, may reduce worker productivity and thus economic growth. In conjunction with at least one corporate partner, the researchers will test the impact of effective scheduling systems on employees via a controlled intervention. They will divide workers into groups, with certain groups receiving greater control over their schedules, and then examine the resulting absenteeism and attrition rates for each group. The research will test the hypothesis that an improved work-life fit will lead to greater job satisfaction for hourly workers, who will in turn be less likely to leave their jobs when family obligations interfere with their schedule, and ultimately will result in enhanced economic security for these workers. At the same time, the research will explore whether employers who implement scheduling practices that improve work-life fit are able to retain experienced employees who are more productive than newly-hired employees.

Experts

Grantee

Morris Kleiner

University of Minnesota

Learn More
Grantee

Heather Sarsons

University of Chicago

Learn More
Grantee

Leah Stokes

University of California, Santa Barbara

Learn More
Grantee

Joan Williams

University of California, Hastings College of Law

Learn More
Grantee

Martina Jasova

Barnard College

Learn More