Research

Is pursuing a PhD a worthwhile financial investment? In new research, Dwayne Benjamin, Boriana Miloucheva, and Natalia Vigezzi compare earnings of PhD graduates to other degree holders, highlighting that the high opportunity costs of pursuing a PhD aren’t always worth it.

Drawing on her working paper, Giovanna Massarotto discusses three algorithmic approaches to how Google can fairly and efficiently share its data with rivals per the requirements of a court’s mandated remedy for illegally monopolizing the online search market.

Many studies have assumed that United States tariff costs are passed onto consumers. In new research, Vanessa Alviarez, Michele Fioretti, Ken Kikkawa, and Monica Morlacco argue that buyer-seller relationship dynamics allow dominant U.S. importers to instead force higher costs onto exporters.

In new research, Priyaranjan Jha, Jyotsana Kala, David Neumark, and Antonio Rodriguez-Lopez find that studies arguing higher minimum wages have no employment effect—or even a positive effect—in many labor markets fail to account for how much less minimum wages matter in larger, higher-wage cities.

In new research, Kenneth Coriale, Ethan Kaplan, and Daniel Kolliner show how the Republican Party has benefited more from redistricting and gerrymandering. Their research has important implications for political power and representation in today’s era of razor-thin Congressional majorities.

In new research, Tomaso Duso, Joseph Harrington, Carl Kreuzberg, and Geza Sapi demonstrate how their screening tool can aid antitrust authorities in identifying potential collusion between firms through public communications.

In new research, David Gindis and Steven G. Medema trace Henry Manne’s entrepreneurial role in the development of the field of law and economics, beginning with a failed venture to bring together economists and legal scholars, but one that established the foundations for later success.

In new research, Adam Callister, Andrew Granato, and Belisa Pang argue that differing incentives faced by plaintiffs and defendants in “battles of the experts” litigation (like securities suits) leads to structurally higher spending by defendants on expert witnesses. These incentives also apply to any class action suit and many individual suits. They argue that courts should take this dynamic into account and correspondingly be more aggressive in using authority to employ court-appointed experts.

Some have argued that environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings are generally more reliable than credit ratings due to how the raters are paid for their work. In new research, Suhas Sridharan and coauthors find that significant conflicts of interest can arise for ESG raters when they also provide ESG index funds to investors.