THIS RFP IS FOR THE 2019 GRANT CYCLE. TO APPLY TO THE 2020 GRANT CYCLE CLICK HERE.

The Washington Center for Equitable Growth seeks to deepen our understanding of whether and how inequality affects economic growth and stability. Our academic grants program is building a portfolio of cutting-edge scholarly research investigating the various channels through which economic inequality may or may not impact economic growth and stability, both directly and indirectly.

We consider proposals that investigate: the consequences of economic inequality on individuals’ economic outcomes and labor market dynamics, as well as group dimensions of inequality, including race, ethnicity, and gender; the causes of inequality to the extent that understanding these causal pathways will help us identify and understand key channels through which economic inequality may affect growth and stability; and the ways in which public policies affect the relationship between inequality and growth.

Equitable Growth supports inquiry utilizing many different kinds of evidence, relying on a variety of methodological approaches and cutting across academic disciplines. We are especially interested in projects using data linking individuals, households, and/or firms, and those that utilize geocoded data or rigorous comparative case studies—including across places in the United States, as well as comparing the experience of different countries—that allow for insight into the role of place in shaping economic opportunities and outcomes.

We are currently requesting proposals in four core areas of interest. We will accept proposals on other topics that are directly related to inequality and growth.

A larger share of U.S. national income has been flowing to the individuals at the top of the income and wealth ladder. These individuals are less likely to spend and more likely to save their money than those with lower incomes. There is evidence that growing income inequality may be contributing to the so-called secular stagnation of macroeconomic growth.

Growing income inequality likely bears on macroeconomic performance through other channels as well. The lower real interest rates that have resulted from higher global saving will limit the ability of conventional monetary policy to stabilize the economy in the next economic downturn. Growing inequality has also contributed to a growing sense that the economy isn’t working for most families, fueling both distrust in institutions and greater political polarization.

We need to better understand the implications of inequality on the long-term stability of our economy and its growth potential. The large and sustained rise in inequality across income and wealth groups, as well as the disparate performance of different geographies and demographic groups, make understanding how these trends could exacerbate economic instability and reduce economic growth a pressing national concern.

Areas of interest include but are not limited to:

The effects of monetary policy: Has the secular decline in interest rates made the macroeconomy more prone to bubbles or limited the potency of countercyclical monetary policy? Are the factors contributing to interest rate decline durable or fleeting? Do monetary policy instruments or rules have important distributional effects, including on asset prices, and do these differ across different instruments or rules, or do their impacts differ by the gender, race and/or ethnicity, or geographic location of workers?

The effects of fiscal policy: Is growing income inequality contributing to secular stagnation, and what role has it played relative to other factors such as demographics and greater global precautionary saving? Is there an argument for lowering public saving to offset private savings?

The effects of the tax and transfer system: How does the tax and transfer system affect economic inequality, including inequality in pretax incomes, consumption, wealth, and broader measures of well-being? When is there a trade-off between redistribution and productivity? When and how do market failures create a role for corrective taxes? How do wealth, wealth transfer, and capital taxes differ in their implications for the level and growth rate of output, the distribution of output, and living standards?

Political economy: What role—if any—does inequality play in the erosion of trust in government and its institutions? What is the relationship between levels of trust and the ability of elected officials and government institutions to make policies that ensure strong, stable, and broadly shared growth? How, if at all, is the distribution of economic gains affected by higher inequality? What is the relationship between domestic economic inequality and global economic integration?

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.

Areas of interest include but are not limited to:

The causes of increased concentration: What are the causes of increased concentration? What role does antitrust enforcement play, as compared to other possible barriers to entry such as intellectual property rules? To what degree do increases in concentration reflect improved efficiency and increased competition? How does common ownership of large blocks of stock affect concentration? How do these factors matter in specific sectors or in comparing sectors? How and why have concentration trends diverged across countries? We are particularly interested in empirical work that examines the state of antitrust enforcement, including the impact of substance and procedural rules, the roles of enforcement agencies’ decision and success rates, and the resources provided to antitrust enforcement.

Consequences of concentration for productivity, investment, and economic growth: What role do monopoly, market power, and new technologies play in new business formation, firm growth, business investment, productivity, and the distribution of national income? How have changes in market power influenced firms’ business investment decisions and ability to borrow? Has market power played a role in would-be entrepreneur’s ability to start new businesses in a way that helps explain the downtrend in productivity growth and start-up rate? Is this era of innovation different than other periods in economic history? How have technological developments such as internet platforms, artificial intelligence, big data, and sophisticated algorithms affected competition?

Consequences of concentration for labor markets and power: Where is monopsony power most prevalent, and what are its causes? Is anticompetitive activity more common in some industries than others? What role do monopoly, market power, and new technologies play in job tasks and occupational segregation? Do the labor market effects of increased concentration depend on the causes, and if so, how? What are the best methodological approaches and data to address these issues?

The labor market is one of the most important institutions determining economic growth and its distribution, as labor income is more than two-thirds of national income. Skill levels and the efficient matching of skills to jobs are key for economic growth. Yet the labor market is not a perfectly competitive market, but rather one that is regulated by a wide array of institutions that affect labor income and its distribution.

We need a better understanding of the two-way link between equitable growth and the labor market. How does the labor market affect equitable growth? How does inequality in turn affect the labor market?

Areas of interest include but are not limited to:

The effect of the labor market on equitable growth: How are labor market institutions succeeding or failing in the face of new forms of workplace organization? What is the effect of labor market conditions and trends on inequality and mobility? How can we measure the relative bargaining power of workers versus employers and the effect it has on pay levels, disparity, and economic growth? What role do public policies such as labor market regulations, social insurance, and safety net policies, as well as both traditional unions and new forms of workplace organization, play in pay levels, disparity, and fostering economic dynamism? We are particularly interested in proposals that take advantage of state and local policy variations in order to shed light on how these policies are shaping outcomes for both individuals and local economies.

The effects of inequality on the labor market: How does inequality affect the smooth functioning of the labor market, including its interactions with search frictions, monopsony, and bargaining power? What explains the recent decrease in labor-force participation rates and wage stagnation across gender, age, and race, and how might inequality be related to these trends? How is inequality shaping the relationship between nonmarket and market work and individuals’ decisions on how to divide their time between the two?

The effects of productivity on the labor market: To what degree do productivity changes pass through to individual wages, either at the aggregate level or productivity gains for particular workers? Does the disconnect between productivity growth and median compensation over the past several decades reflect a change in the causal relationship between these two variables? How does the tightness of the labor market affect aggregate productivity, as well as the distribution of gains to workers? What factors affect how economywide growth is or is not shared between different types of workers?

The acquisition and deployment of human capital in the market drives advances in productivity. The extent to which someone is rich or poor, experiences family instability, faces discrimination, or grows up in an opportunity-rich or opportunity-poor neighborhood affects future economic outcomes and can subvert the processes that lead to productivity gains, which drive long-term growth.

How does economic inequality affect the development of human capital, and to what extent do aggregate trends in human capital explain inequality dynamics? To what extent can social programs counteract these underlying dynamics? We are interested in proposals that investigate the mechanisms through which economic inequality might work to alter the development of human potential across the generational arc, as well as the policy mechanisms through which inequality’s potential impacts on human capital development and deployment may be mitigated.

Areas of interest include but are not limited to:

Economic opportunity and intergenerational mobility: How do different levels or kinds of inequality impact the potential for talent to emerge across gender, race, ethnicity, and place, as well as across income, earnings, or wealth distributions? How does the “missing Einsteins” phenomenon affect innovation and growth? How do income, earnings, and wealth inequality relate to income, earnings, and wealth mobility both within and across generations, and how do these relationships vary across demographic groups? What policies are effective at breaking the link between family background and economic outcomes? What is the relationship between public policy, wealth accumulation, and the intergenerational transfer of wealth on intra- and intergenerational economic mobility?

Economic instability: Are families across the income distribution more susceptible to economic volatility (in earnings, income, assets, debt, and consumption), and how is that volatility shaping human capital development across the generational arc? How well are social insurance systems operating to cushion the effects of economic mobility on human capital development, and what insights can be gleaned about how they can be improved?

Family stability: How is inequality impacting the functioning of the household as an economic unit? How, if at all, is inequality impacting family formation and family stability, and how are societal trends in family structure contributing to inequality trends? What role do public policies play in shaping household formation and family economic security, and how does that differ across demographic and socioeconomic groups?

Neighborhood characteristics: What characteristics of neighborhoods have a causal effect on the development of human capital? Who benefits from place-based public programs? Which place-based programs are most effective in promoting human capital development? Are place-based or person(family)-based programs more effective, and for whom?

Solicitations are open to researchers affiliated with U.S. universities. Equitable Growth has two funding streams: academic and doctoral/postdoctoral.

Academic grants are open to researchers affiliated with a U.S. university. The affiliated university must administer the grant.

Doctoral/postdoctoral grants are open to graduate students currently enrolled in a doctoral program at a U.S. university and to recent Ph.D. graduates currently in a postdoctoral position at a U.S. university. If you are currently a graduate student or in a postdoctoral position, you may choose to apply for either an academic or doctoral/postdoctoral grant, depending on the pool in which you’d like to compete.

Equitable Growth supports inquiry utilizing many different kinds of evidence, relying on a variety of methodological approaches and cutting across academic disciplines. We consider proposals that investigate: the consequences of economic inequality on individuals’ economic outcomes and labor market dynamics, as well as group dimensions of inequality; the causes of inequality to the extent that understanding these causal pathways will help us identify and understand key channels through which economic inequality may affect growth and stability; and the ways in which public policies affect the relationship between inequality and growth.

We are currently requesting proposals in the four core areas of interest outlined above: macroeconomic policy; market structure; the labor market; and human capital. We will accept proposals on other topics that are directly related to inequality and growth.

Equitable Growth is willing to fund a wide range of activities, including researcher salary and benefits, research assistance, data purchase, and costs associated with conducting experiments or participating in professional conferences. Our grants cannot cover indirect overhead.

Academic grants are typically in the $25,000 to $100,000 range over 1 to 3 years. We will also consider proposals for larger grants for exceptional projects. We frequently partner with other foundations to support projects jointly or to share proposals that are not a fit for our grant program but which may be of interest to other funders.

Doctoral/postdoctoral grants are funded at $15,000 over 1 year.

For more information about the research we have supported or the level of funding we provide, please explore the Funded Research section of our website.

THIS RFP IS FOR THE 2019 GRANT CYCLE. TO APPLY TO THE 2020 GRANT CYCLE CLICK HERE.

Equitable Growth is building a pipeline of scholars doing cutting edge research on inequality and growth. Our Dissertation Scholars Program is in-resident and provides Ph.D. candidates with financial and professional support to pursue their own research and to gain familiarity with current policy discussions and the policy process.

The position is open to predissertation scholars who are currently enrolled in a Ph.D. program at a U.S. university and whose research aligns with Equitable Growth’s funding priorities. Dissertation scholars are given an annualized $50,000 stipend, office space, and professional support, and are expected to support Equitable Growth’s grant program.

Scheduling is flexible to permit for travel to home institutions, as well as academic conferences. Tenure is at least one academic year, with the possibility of extension into a second year.

To apply to the Dissertation Scholars Program, submit a proposal for a doctoral/postdoctoral grant and select Dissertation Scholars Program on the application form. In addition to a proposal, application to the program requires two academic letters of reference, preferably from your chair and an advisor, and a statement of purpose.

Letters of reference should be submitted via email to grants@equitablegrowth.org. All other application materials will be uploaded through the online application form.

The statement of purpose should be about two pages and should describe your motivating research questions, the direction you anticipate your research agenda taking, and how that relates to Equitable Growth’s mission. It should also describe how you hope to spend your time in Washington and how that will help further your career/research. Dissertation Scholar applicants will automatically be considered for a doctoral grant.

Applicants selected to move forward in the Dissertation Scholar process will be asked to interview with Equitable Growth staff in person in April/May 2019. Selection decisions will be announced in June 2019.

THIS RFP IS FOR THE 2019 GRANT CYCLE. TO APPLY TO THE 2020 GRANT CYCLE CLICK HERE.

To apply for an academic grant, submit a letter of inquiry using the online submission form.

Letters of inquiry are short descriptions of a research project. They should be approximately two pages (about 1,200 words) in length. Letters of inquiry that are more than 2,000 words will not be considered. While we do not want to be overly prescriptive, the word limit is designed to encourage concision and clarity.

Letters of inquiry must include:

• Problem addressed by the research
• Expected contribution to the literature
• Methodological approach, including data sources and research design
• Timeline for completion

We encourage applicants to consider policy implications. Development of new data sources is also of interest.

If tables, graphs, or other images are helpful in explaining your project, they can be included. While they will not count against the word limit, we encourage you to limit the use of images to one or two.

A preliminary budget is also required and should be submitted as a brief narrative (approximately 50 to 150 words, though a strict limit is not enforced). At this stage, we are interested in the total expected cost of the project and a general breakdown of those costs (such as salary, research assistance, costs associated with data collection, travel, or conference fees). If applicable, please include a brief description of other secured or anticipated funding sources for the proposed work. A more detailed project budget will be required for applicants who are invited to submit a full proposal.

An abbreviated curriculum vitae is also required.

Deadlines for academic grants

Academic letters of inquiry are due by 11:59 p.m. EST on January 31, 2019.

If invited, full proposals will be due by 11:59 p.m. EDT on April 30, 2019.

Full proposals will be reviewed by our research and policy staff, external peer reviewers, and members of our Steering Committee.

Funding decisions will be announced in late June/early July 2019. We anticipate that funds will be distributed in early fall 2019, though the timing of disbursement depends in part on the particulars of the project and the researcher’s home institution.

THIS RFP IS FOR THE 2019 GRANT CYCLE. TO APPLY TO THE 2020 GRANT CYCLE CLICK HERE.

To apply for a doctoral/postdoctoral grant, complete the online submission form.

Doctoral/postdoctoral applicants do not need to submit a letter of inquiry. Professional references are also not required if only applying for a doctoral/postdoctoral grant, though we do require a curriculum vitae.

Doctoral/postdoctoral proposals should be approximately six single-spaced pages with standard font and margins (not including bibliography). Proposals should address the following:

• The problem or question your research seeks to address
• How it relates to Equitable Growth’s mission
• Anticipated contribution to the literature
• Detailed methodological approach, including data sources and research design
• Potential policy implications
• A timeline for completion

A preliminary budget is also required and should be submitted as a narrative. If direct costs such as data purchase or research assistance are anticipated, they should be listed. If funding will be used for support only, simply state that.

Deadlines for doctoral/postdoctoral grants

Doctoral submissions are due by 11:59 p.m. EDT on Sunday March 10, 2019.

Funding decisions will be announced in late June/early July 2019. We anticipate that funds will be distributed by the start of the 2019—20 academic year, though the timing of disbursement depends in part on the particulars of the project and whether it will be administered as an individual or institutional grant.

The majority of doctoral/postdoctoral grants are administered as individual grants and are awarded directly to the individual.

Institutional grants are typically awarded when the grantee is not a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. Recipients must be a U.S. citizen or permanent resident to receive funding directly. Otherwise, funding is administered through the university. A decision on funding type is not needed until after awards are announced, although non-U.S. persons are advised to communicate their intention to apply with their institution to ensure adherence to institutional protocol if funded.

THIS RFP IS FOR THE 2019 GRANT CYCLE. TO APPLY TO THE 2020 GRANT CYCLE CLICK HERE.

Submit your proposal by completing the online application form.

If you have questions or are having trouble with the online form, please email grants@equitablegrowth.org. If you are having trouble with the online form and it is nearing the deadline, you may email your application materials as an attachment to grants@equitablegrowth.org.