Distilling microeconomics research into direct policy implications will be the focus of a new website developed by researchers at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, University College London, Princeton University, Harvard University, London School of Economics Northwestern University, University of California, San Diego, University of Manchester and Yale University.
Microeconomic Insights – which was launched this week while economists gathered at the American Economic Association’s annual conference in San Francisco – will bridge the gap between academia and policy by publishing short, non-technical summaries of economic research for a public policy audience.
The summaries, which will be written by academics and edited by journalists, will cover all areas of microeconomics including development, health economics, environmental economics, international trade, public finance, industrial organisation and labour economics.
"In microeconomics, there are many new methodologies relevant to policy, but they don’t always filter down to the public policy debate," said Rachel Griffith, a member of the editorial board, research director at the Institute for Fiscal Studies and professor of economics at the University of Manchester. "Our goal is to fill that missing market."
Like an academic journal, content featured on the website will be chosen by an editorial committee that will select the best research in microeconomics, irrespective of institution and political or ideological viewpoints. Particular emphasis will be placed upon the work of young researchers working at the research frontier.
The editorial committee will work with its academic authors to produce short research briefs intended for public policy practitioners. These summaries will be handed off to a team of editors and journalists adept at writing for the public. The final results will be distributed through the website, social media accounts and dedicated distribution email lists.
"Our site will give new research ideas an independent and accessible home," Rachel Griffith said. "It will provide a public good by getting top academic research into the hands of leading policy practitioners."
In addition to Rachel Griffith, the editorial board is comprised of Joseph Altonji, Thomas Dewitt Cuyler Professor of Economics at Yale University; Orazio Attanasio, research director at IFS and Jeremy Bentham professor of economics at University College London; Oriana Bandiera, professor of economics at the London School of Economics; Richard Blundell, director of the ESRC Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy at IFS and Ricardo Professor of Political Economy at University College London; Roger Gordon, professor of economics at the University of California, San Diego; Ariel Pakes, Steven McArthur Heller Professor of Economics at Harvard University; Robert Porter, William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of Economics at Northwestern University; and Steven Redding, Harold T. Shapiro ’64 Professor in Economics at Princeton.
Support for the website is provided by the Economic and Social Research Council (via the Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Polict at IFS and the Institute's Impact Acceleration Account), Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School, the University of Southern California Dornsife Center For Economic and Social Research and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.
The first three articles featured on the website cover these issues:
Many fear that climate change will have severe effects on the global economy, particularly through the threat to food production and farmers’ earnings. This research suggests that much of the potential harm could be avoided if farmers can switch their crops in response to changing relative yields. But it is 'intra-national trade' – trade among farmers and between farmers and consumers within countries – rather than international trade that will be crucial in alleviating the consequences of climate change.
NHS hospitals in England are rarely closed in constituencies where the governing party has a slender majority. This means that for near random reasons, those areas have more competition in healthcare – which has allowed Nicholas Bloom and John Van Reenen to assess its impact on management quality and clinical performance.
Does greater regulation of consumer financial products actually benefit consumers? This research, analysing the CARD act enacted in the U.S. in 2009, suggests that it does. In particular, the act’s restrictions on hidden credit card fees were found to reduce borrowing costs (especially for consumers with low credit scores) without increasing interest charges and other fees and without reducing access to credit.
For more information, visit the Microeconomic Insights website or follow the Twitter feed - @micro_econ.
