This project aims to provide a detailed, comprehensive analysis of the Amazon.com Inc. platform, its evolution, market power, and welfare implications. Gutierrez will utilize a massive dataset that has product information, alongside prices and sales ranks, for products sold on Amazon’s platform to produce three papers. The first will provide an overview of the Amazon platform and study the evolution and heterogeneity of fees in order to empirically test whether Amazon’s fees to sellers reflect market power. The second will consist of a structural analysis of reselling to test whether Amazon competing on its own platform is anticompetitive. And the third paper will analyze the impact of private label products. This research not only examines the Amazon platform but also provides empirical evidence on whether these types of activities can be anticompetitive.
Archives: Grant
The Welfare Effects of Price Discrimination Under Endogenous Product Entry: the case of Implantable Medical Devices
This project seeks to answer two questions: What are the welfare effects of third-degree price discrimination, and what are the effects of third-degree price discrimination on the take-up of newer and better technologies? Goel will address this question in the context of a particular type of implantable medical device: defibrillators. The implantable medical device industry has three features that make it a compelling setting to study. First, manufacturers are able to prevent hospitals from disclosing prices, allowing them to charge different prices for the same device in different hospitals. Second, the industry is very concentrated, with more than 95 percent of the market share captured by just four firms. And third, there is a lot of product variety. On average, a manufacturer offers six brands of this particular device per year from 2014–2019. Goel will utilize a rich dataset with purchase volumes, prices, and characteristics of defibrillators, and will combine this with approval information from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. She will then estimate a model of supply and demand, and conduct a counterfactual analysis in which third-degree price discrimination is banned in order to understand the dynamics of price discrimination.
The Impact of Paid Sick Leave Mandates on Women’s Employment, Income, and Economic Security
As the U.S. economy emerges from the coronavirus recession, public policies to support women’s ability to return to work and stay in the workforce will be necessary for economic recovery. This study seeks to assess if paid sick leave reduces short-term income volatility and increases long-term economic security through improved job attachment among women, particularly those who are less likely to have access to paid sick leave in the absence of paid sick leave mandates. Using the American Community Survey, Slopen will conduct analyses at the state and county level using the five states and 21 counties that implemented paid sick leave as the treatment group. She will exploit the variation in the timing of the implementation of mandates at the state or county level using a difference-in-differences approach to estimate the effect of paid sick leave mandates on women’s labor force participation, continuity of employment, weekly hours worked, income, and poverty. She also will identify effects on subpopulations most likely to lack access to paid sick leave in the absence of mandates.
Optimal Monetary Policy with Menu Costs is Nominal Wage Targeting
Central banks across the developed world are reconsidering their monetary policy frameworks and are frequently looking to academic research to inform the question of whether to stick with the dominant paradigm of inflation targeting or to adopt a new monetary policy regime. To address this question, Halperin and Caratelli will build a model where price stickiness is modeled in a substantially more realistic way, compared to other models, in order to explore whether it is optimal for central banks to use nominal income targeting rather than inflation targeting. The two researchers will examine whether nominal income targeting would mean that central banks would not have to tighten policy in response to strong wage growth, which could boost equitable growth.
School-to-Work Pathway and Racial/Ethnic Inequality among College Graduates
This project examines the source of racial and ethnic inequality among the highly educated workforce in the United States by focusing on how educational credentials translate into U.S. labor market outcomes. The racial and ethnic wage divide is the largest and has expanded the most among highly educated workers, despite the fact that people of color in the United States are registering higher educational attainment. This project seeks to shed light on that by exploring how educational credentials translate into positions in the U.S. labor market and whether there are mismatches. Specifically, the project will investigate vertical and horizontal dimensions of education-occupation mismatches. Vertical mismatch refers to a mismatch between a worker’s educational credentials and the level of education required for the occupation, such as a college graduate working as a retail sales associate. Horizontal mismatch refers to a mismatch between a worker’s field of study and the type of education required for the occupation, for example, an engineering major working as an accountant. Lu will incorporate a demand-based measure of mismatch using online job-posting data compiled by Burning Glass Technologies, in addition to pooling two decades of nationally representative longitudinal data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation. She will investigate which dimensions of mismatch and which processes in the employment relationship drive racial and ethnic labor market inequality by exploring initial occupational allocation, subsequent occupational trajectory, and wage consequences of mismatch. Lu also will investigate how educational stratification factors into ethnic/racial disparities by looking at degree levels, fields of study, and college quality.
Understanding Climate Damages: Consumption versus Investment
When humans undertake physically intensive tasks, the body must release heat to maintain a safe internal temperature. Worker safety organizations have strict guidelines for climate conditions under which it is safe for workers to perform strenuous manual labor. Rising temperatures from climate change will increase the risk of heat stress, making outdoor work more difficult. This study seeks to quantify these implications for capital accumulation, growth, and consumption by building a discrete time growth model of a closed economy. Unlike standard climate-economy models, Casey, Fried, and Gibson will account for differences in the way that climate affects the production of investment goods and services, compared to consumption goods and services. The model is designed to capture how vulnerability to climate change differs between consumption and investment sectors and how this difference evolves over time. It builds on past work by considering climate change as a determinant of productivity and considering a more disaggregated representation of the economy.
Public Investment, Manufacturing Work Opportunity, and Upward Mobility in Midcentury America: Evidence from World War II
Manufacturing jobs in the United States were widely considered to provide an important opportunity for less-educated workers to climb the U.S. economic ladder by offering high pay and stable careers. Research shows that the decline in manufacturing jobs since the 1970s coincided with a decline in upward mobility: Children born in the 1980s are less likely to grow up to earn as much as their parents than children born in the 1950s were, particularly in the post-industrial heartland. This project examines how increases in high-wage manufacturing work opportunity affected individual opportunity following the industrial mobilization for World War II. Garin and Rothbaum will exploit the fact that the siting of new plants was based on idiosyncratic short-run strategic considerations, leading to the construction of massive new publicly financed manufacturing plants in places that would not have been chosen by private firms. This historical dynamic gives rise to an ideal laboratory for studying how public investments that create high-wage employment impact upward mobility in the long run. The authors have digitized data on the locations of World War II manufacturing facilities using the War Production Board data books. Focusing on children who grew up in those areas in the 1940s, the two researchers will then trace those individuals’ income trajectories using the later-20th century Current Population Survey data linked to Social Security Administration-based income histories to examine mobility rates.
The Effect of Government Safety Enforcement on Workers: Evidence from Linked Employer-Employee Data
Johnson and Levine seek to understand how enforcement of government safety regulations affects workers’ wages and how the effect differs across groups of workers based on income, race, and ethnicity in the United States. While prior work focused on whether inspections lower subsequent workplace injuries and affect overall establishment payroll, scholars don’t know much, if anything, about the impact of inspections on individual workers’ wages. If regulatory enforcement lowers wages at the same time it improves health and safety, then the overall effects on worker well-being may be mixed. The two researchers will utilize the randomness of inspections by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. This setting offers a unique opportunity to evaluate the effects of inspections as if examining a randomized controlled trial. Johnson and Levine plan to compare the trajectories of establishments (and workers at those establishments) randomly selected for inspection to those eligible but not selected for inspection. Inspection data will be linked to the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics data series. In addition to yielding new evidence about the impact of safety and health regulatory enforcement on workers’ wages, this work also has the potential to contribute to the current literature on monopsony power in labor markets by investigating whether the effect of inspections on wages varies by local labor market concentration.
Joint Ventures in Dialysis Care: Improving Coordination or Enabling Market Power?
In virtually all areas of the U.S. healthcare service sector, physicians are barred from referring patients to entities in which they have an ownership stake. But this is not the case for the dialysis industry, which is exempt from such restrictions. Joint ventures between physicians and dialysis facilities exist at nearly 20 percent of facilities. This research will explore how physicians’ ownership ties with dialysis firms affect steering, spending, and outcomes. Using data obtained from a Freedom of Information Act request from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Eliason, McDevitt, and Roberts will construct a first-of-its-kind dataset that tracks the ownership of dialysis facilities, including whether physicians have an ownership stake. They will add in data on dialysis providers and patients, including detailed Medicare claims and rich information on patient characteristics and health outcomes. An event-study analysis will allow the three researchers to test whether there is a clear trend-break in new patient arrivals and referrals when parties enter into a joint venture in order to examine how integration affects competition. The analysis will enable the researchers to study how patient caseloads and referrals at unintegrated facilities change after a nearby rival forms a joint venture, along with the impact of vertical integration on patient outcomes such as hospitalizations and mortality, as well as overall Medicare spending. Prior research has found that Black, Latinx, and low-income patients suffer disproportionately from kidney failure and often receive worse care, potentially making these groups especially vulnerable to providers’ growing market power and physicians’ conflicting interests.
Who Weathers the Storm? The Unequal Effects of Hurricanes in the United States
Understanding the degree to which, and how, hurricanes have had disparate effects across disadvantaged and advantaged groups in the United States is key to policymakers’ ability to craft climate policy that ensures disadvantaged communities do not bear the brunt of our warming world. Most of the literature in this area has focused on average impacts, with relatively little attention paid to heterogeneity. But even in cases where no negative impacts of natural disasters are found, on average, some subgroups may experience substantial negative effects. This project leverages newly linked administrative tax data from the IRS and demographic information from the American Community Survey and decennial census with exogenous variation in individual-level exposure to all hurricanes in the United States between 1995 and 2019. The analysis seeks to uncover a deeper understanding of the consequences of and responses to hurricanes, and how these effects differ across socioeconomic and demographic groups.