Monthly Archives: May 2019

Six weeks to go until School moves to new home

With less than six weeks to go until the School of Economics moves the brand new Kennedy Building, work is under way to prepare the building for the move in at the start of July.

Inside the building, furniture is being installed, final checks are being made before the School vacates Keynes College and moves to the state-of-the-art Kennedy Building. In an effort to reduce waste, the School is making a conscious effort to recycle where possible, instead of throwing things away. The recycling efforts will continue in the Kennedy building with the removal of personal bins. Outside the building, plants and grass are beginning to take shape, greatly helped by the recent spring weather.

If you are on campus, why not take a walk past to see the latest developments.

Labelled loans and sanitation investments

Dr Bansi Malde co-wrote a blog post on her research into sanitation in India, which featured in the Ideas for India blog. Rural Indian households report lack of affordability as the main reason for not having a toilet. Bansi’s article investigates – through an experiment in rural Maharashtra – whether microcredit labelled for sanitation can increase sanitation investments. It finds that targeted households demand the sanitation loans, and toilet uptake increases by 9 percentage points; however, roughly half of the loans were not used for sanitation.

See full Ideas for India blog post here.

Dr Fernanda Lopez de Leon

Social Effects of the Vote of the Majority: Field-Experiment on the Brexit-Vote

by Fernanda L. Lopez de Leon, School of Economics and Markus Bindemann, School of Psychology, University of Kent. Discussion paper KDPE 1905, April 2019.

Non-technical summary:

The UK is scheduled to leave the EU this year. The current plans include the end of free movement. According to the Prime Minister, May, this is crucial in delivering the Brexit for which people voted in 2016. In fact, the Brexit results were widely perceived as a statement against immigration, voiced by 17 million in the country.

Did the Brexit-vote change citizens’ attitudes towards immigrants living in the UK?

The information – inferred by the Referenda results – on the population’s views about immigration could have triggered a change. Individuals could have adapted their attitudes accordingly, with an empowerment of anti-social attitudes – in line with the view that the Brexit result unearthed racism – or by refraining pre-existent views and attitudes in a way to conform to the vote of the majority.

We conducted a field-experiment among 342 individuals in the South East of England in 2017-18, to test whether the Brexit vote had triggered anti-social attitudes towards immigrants.

Using a computerized quiz, we provided truthful information on how the local majority voted, but on selected constituencies. These were selected in a seemingly random way by the computer. We made use of the fact that although most people might know that 52% voted to Leave, less is known the local support for Brexit, so we were providing novel information.

For one group, the ‘Remain’, individuals were informed about referenda results for nearby constituencies whose majority voted to remain in the EU. The ‘Leave’ group, were informed about nearby constituencies where the majority voted to leave the EU, and for the control group, we informed about constituencies’ demographic composition. Individuals generalised the information we gave – that the local majority voted in favour or against the UK to leave the EU – to other places in the country. Overall, individuals assigned to the ‘Leave’ condition guessed that the percentage of votes to leave the EU was 18 percentage points higher, on average, than individuals assigned to the ‘Remain’ condition.

We use this experiment to investigate how the perception of a larger local support for Brexit affects individuals’ extrinsic and intrinsic attitudes towards immigrants in the UK. We find no impacts on individuals’ intrinsic prejudice, measured by Implicit Association Tests – a test used in social psychology, that measures views at an unconscious level. However, we did detect effects of the information about how the majority voted – on some extrinsic attitudes towards immigrants. These are visible in self-reported views on policies and in real money allocations among participants.

Some of our main findings are:

We find no impact of the Brexit-vote on the demand for more restricted immigration policies. No effects were noticed on the demand for quotas for settlement for Europeans, quotas for settlement for non-Europeans or establishment of targets to reduce immigration. We also find no impact of the Brexit vote on the support for immigrants to live on own and separate neighbourhoods.

However, the information that the majority is supporting ‘Leave’ than ‘Remain’ affected views on other policies. Participants in the ‘Leave’ condition were less likely to agree that “the NHS should be free to use for all” (‘Leave’ 35.2% versus ‘Remain’ 46.3%). Also participants in the ‘Leave’ condition were more likely to agree with the UKIP proposed policy that ‘Britain should end multi-lingual formatting of official documents’ (‘Leave’ 25% versus ‘Remain’ 14.7%).

During the survey, participants were asked to split a bonus of £10 between themselves and another participant. We varied the name of the recipient to be: Henry (UK name), Hans (German name) and Pawel (Polish name), and investigate whether group-biases (confirmed in case of larger donations to Henry and lower donations to Pawel or Hans) were more accentuated in the ‘Leave’ condition. Our results do not fully corroborate that. The information that the majority voted to ‘Leave’ led to lower donations in general – both to Henry and to Hans (but not to Pawel). This is more in line with the explanation that people might feel poorer and hence less generous under the thought that the majority support ‘Leave’.

Overall, our findings suggest that the population infers information from referenda results that manifests as changes in attitudes. In the Brexit case, we find some evidence that immigrants are viewed in a more negative light. For example, participants in the ‘Leave’ condition were more likely to agree that “foreign people in the UK who receive state support could get along without it if they tried harder” (‘Leave’ 39.4% vs ‘Remain’ 27.3%).

You can read the complete paper here.

School welcomes Prof Jeffrey Wooldridge for Q&A and book signing

On Wednesday 15 May, the School of Economics had the pleasure of welcoming Professor Jeffrey Wooldridge from Michigan State University for a Q&A and book signing, followed by a drinks reception. Professor Wooldridge is a globally recognised econometrician, lecturer and author, who wrote Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, which is one of our core textbooks.

The Q&A session was hosted by Dr Olena Nizalova, who had been taught by Professor Wooldridge during her studies. The session focused on both the personal and professional aspects of Professor Wooldridge’s life, during which he discussed the role of education and what is needed to truly evaluate teachers and schools. He examined the challenges that analysts face when dealing with large amounts of money and talked about his work as a consultant for the US government and for large international cooperations.

Following the Q&A session, both students and staff enjoyed the opportunity to get their textbooks signed by the Professor, together with a photograph. Professor Wooldridge’s publishers Cengage and Blackwell’s bookshop were also present at the event.

A video of the Q&A session is available here. 

Prof Tony Thirlwall

40th anniversary of Tony Thirlwall’s influential paper

2019 marks the 40th anniversary of Tony Thirlwall’s influential paper ‘The Balance of Payments Constraint as an Explanation of International Growth Rate Differences’ published in the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, March 1979, which now has 1,700 Google Scholar citations.

To commemorate, there will be a Special Issue of the Review of Keynesian Economics devoted to the paper; also a Spanish translation of the paper in the Mexican journal, Investigacion Economia, and a Portuguese translation in the Brazilian journal, Nova Economia.

Ethnic Identity and the Employment Outcomes of Immigrants: Evidence from France

by Isaure Delaporte, University of Kent. Discussion paper KDPE 1904, May 2019.

Non-technical summary:

Although ethnic identity is potentially an important determinant of the immigrants’ labour market outcomes, the effect remains unclear. On one hand, immigrants who are not committed to the host country culture might suffer from a lack of host country specific human capital. They are also likely to interact mostly with co-ethnics and to experience labour market discrimination. Besides, a strong attachment to the origin country culture is often associated with traditional gender norms. All these effects would in turn lead to lower labour market outcomes.

On the other hand, ethnic identity can be seen as an additional input that increases the cultural capital and the social capital of the migrant. Employers might also want to diversify the set of individual skills in the workplace to allow for complementarities in production. In this sense, immigrants who are attached to both the culture of their country of origin and the culture of the host country can have better employment outcomes.

The objective of this paper is twofold: first, to determine the immigrants’ ethnic identity, i.e. the degree of identification to the culture and society of the country of origin and the host country and second, to investigate the impact of ethnic identity on the immigrants’ employment outcomes. To answer these questions, this study uses a rich French survey named Trajectoires et Origines (TeO). The extensive information provided by the data allows the construction of two richer measures of ethnic identity than the ones used in the literature, namely: i) the degree of commitment to the origin country culture and ii) the extent to which the individual holds multiple identities.

The results show that having multiple identities increases the probability of being employed for both the first- and the second-generation immigrants while having a minority identity does not affect the migrants’ probability of being employed. The results obtained contribute to help design effective post-immigration policies. They have important implications for improving the economic outcomes of the migrants and in turn enriching receiving countries.

You can download the complete paper here.

School holds second alumni meet up in London

On Thursday 2 May, the School held its second London Alumni Meet Up. This year, we headed to The Yorkshire Grey for drinks, food and a catch up.

Professor Iain Fraser, Dr John Peirson, Professor Alan Carruth, Dr Bill Collier and Dr Alastair Bailey were in attendance and enjoyed reminiscing and hearing about the achievements of our alumni.

If you haven’t already please connect with us on LinkedIn.