Publications

La plupart des informations présentées ci-dessous ont été récupérées via RePEc avec l'aimable autorisation de Christian Zimmermann
Introduction to the thematic issue on government-provided servicesJournal articleRabah Amir, Helmuth Cremer et Rim Lahmandi-Ayed, Journal of Public Economic Theory, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp. 839-844, 2020
Steuart, Hegel, Chamley: A Case Upon the Nature of ‘Influence’Book chapterGilles Campagnolo, In: The Economic Thought of Sir James Steuart - First Economist of the Scottish Enlightenment, J. M. Menudo (Eds.), 2020, pp. 214-240, Routledge, 2020

From July 25 to 31, 1796, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, then working as a private tutor for the aristocracy in Bern, took a mountain hike in the neighbouring Alps. Hegel travelled from Thoune to Altdorg via the Jungfrau and the Uri, a land of glaciers. As Hegel began studying economics for good, the query would reappear: in his reading of Sir James Steuart’s Inquiry into the Principles of Political economy, Hegel would make his first step into economic theorizing. In Frankfurt, Hegel was not yet a tenured Gymnasium professor. He was again a private tutor, experiencing hardships of a salaried life – though in wealthy families. Paul Chamley selected excerpts of interest based on his first assessment of the thesis that there surely exists a solid ‘system of political economy’ by Hegel. He assumed it rather than he found it as a result of his comparative study.

Introduction : à la (re)découverte de l’école autrichienne d’économie (nationale)Journal articleGilles Campagnolo, Austriaca, Gilles Campagnolo (Eds.), Volume 90, Issue n° spécial « L’école autrichienne d’économie », pp. 7-24, 2020

-

Manufacturing Doubt: How Firms Exploit Scientific Uncertainty to Shape RegulationBook chapterYann Bramoullé et Caroline Orset, In: A Research Agenda for Environmental Economics, Matthias Ruth (Eds.), 2020, pp. 215-230, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020

Many regulations with first-order economic and environmental consequences have to be adopted under significant scientific uncertainty. Examples include tobacco regulations in the second half of the 20th century, climate change regulations and current regulations on pesticides and neonicotinoid insecticides. Firms and industries have proved adept at exploiting such scientific uncertainty to shape and delay regulation. The main strategies documented include: hiring and funding dissenting scientists, producing and publicizing favorable scientific findings, ghostwriting, funding diversion research, conducting large-scale science-denying communication campaigns, and placing experts on advisory and regulatory panels while generally concealing involvement. In many cases, special interests have thus deliberately manufactured doubt and these dishonest tactics have had large welfare consequences.
Largely and unduly neglected by economists, these doubt-manufacturing strategies should now be addressed by the field. Here, we first present a simple theoretical framework providing a useful starting point for considering these issues. The government is benevolent but populist and maximizes social welfare as perceived by citizens. The industry can produce costly reports showing that its activity is not harmful, and citizens are unaware of the industry’s miscommunication. This framework raises important new questions, such as how industry miscommunication and citizens’ beliefs are related to scientific uncertainty. It also sheds new light on old questions, such as the choice of policy instrument to regulate pollution. We subsequently outline a tentative roadmap for future research, highlighting critical issues in need of more investigation.

Comment lutter contre la fraude fiscale ? Les enseignements de l’économie comportementaleBookNicolas Jacquemet, Stéphane Luchini et Antoine Malézieux, CEPREMAP, 2020, Number 53, 104 pages, Rue d'Ulm, 2020

La fraude fiscale est un sujet qui se dérobe aux outils de l’analyse économique traditionnelle. D’une part, comme toute activité illégale, la fraude fiscale échappe à l’observation du chercheur en même temps qu’elle se dissimule aux autorités : l’analyse empirique de son ampleur, de ses déterminants et de la manière dont différents dispositifs l’affectent est nécessairement très limitée. D’autre part, sur le plan théorique, l’application simple du calcul coût-bénéfice auquel est supposé se livrer le contribuable « rationnel » conduit à un paradoxe : contrairement à une idée largement répandue, les bénéfices de la fraude fiscale sont tellement élevés, et le risque de sanction est tellement faible, que l’on peut s’étonner qu’elle soit aussi peu pratiquée dans l’ensemble des économies développées. Plutôt que la fraude fiscale, c’est donc la «soumission fiscale» qui en constitue le pendant, la disposition à payer l’impôt, qu’il convient d’expliquer pour en comprendre les déterminants.

Le double défi que posent les décisions de fraude fiscale à l’analyse économique n’a pu être relevé que très récemment, grâce à l’émergence, au cours des vingt dernières années, d’une nouvelle approche, l’économie comportementale, qui s’appuie sur la psychologie pour mieux comprendre les comportements économiques ; et, conjointement, d’une nouvelle méthode, l’économie expérimentale, qui permet d’étudier empiriquement les comportements économiques sur lesquels il est difficile de collecter des données convaincantes.

Cet opuscule rend compte des résultats de ces travaux et présente un panorama des outils de politique fiscale qui s’en dégagent.

The BootstrapBook chapterRussell Davidson et Stan Hurn, In: SAGE Research Methods Foundations, P. Atkinson, S. Delamont, A. Cernat, J. W. Sakshaug et R. A. Williams (Eds.), 2020, Volume on-line, SAGE Publications Ltd, 2020

The bootstrap is a technique for performing statistical inference. The underlying idea is that most properties of an unknown distribution can be estimated as the same properties of an estimate of that distribution. In most cases, these properties must be estimated by a simulation experiment. The parametric bootstrap can be used when a statistical model is estimated using maximum likelihood since the parameter estimates thus obtained serve to characterise a distribution that can subsequently be used to generate simulated data sets. Simulated test statistics or estimators can then be computed for each of these data sets, and their distribution is an estimate of their distribution under the unknown distribution. The most popular sort of bootstrap is based on resampling the observations of the original data set with replacement in order to constitute simulated data sets, which typically contain some of the original observations more than once, some not at all. A special case of the bootstrap is a Monte Carlo test, whereby the test statistic has the same distribution for all data distributions allowed by the null hypothesis under test. A Monte Carlo test permits exact inference with the probability of Type I error equal to the significance level. More generally, there are two Golden Rules which, when followed, lead to inference that, although not exact, is often a striking improvement on inference based on asymptotic theory. The bootstrap also permits construction of confidence intervals of improved quality. Some techniques are discussed for data that are heteroskedastic, autocorrelated, or clustered.

Critique of Mainstream Austrian Economics in the Spirit of Carl MengerJournal articleAntoine Gentier et Antal Fekete, Revue de philosophie économique, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp. 163-176, 2020
Étude sur la situation économique et sociale des parents isolés : niveau de vie, marché du travail et politiques publiquesReportHélène Périvier, Guillaume Allègre, Stephen Bazen, Bruno Ducoudre, Xavier Joutard, Pierre Madec, Muriel Pucci et Raul Sampognaro, pp. 72, 2020
EEAG Corona Policy Brief July 2020: Europe’s Pandemic PoliticsReportTorben M. Andersen, Giuseppe Bertola, Clemens Fuest, Cecilia Garcia-Peñalosa, Harold James, Jan-Egbert Sturm et Branko Uroševic, Number July, 2020

The corona pandemic has created a health and economic crisis without modern parallel. As it hit affected countries ill-prepared and spread quickly within the EU, member states had to adopt more interventionist approaches than ever before – particularly in the areas of fiscal and monetary policy, labor markets and redistribution, and industrial policy. EU member states started controversial discussions about how to support those that were hit particularly hard. This debate has become a litmus test for solidarity in the world's richest bloc of nations.

The decisions and measures taken in each country and at the European level will set the course for economic development in the coming years and shape the countries' long-term prospects for decades to come. This EEAG policy brief is a supplement to the group's usual annual report. The authors examine the various effects of the crisis, how Europe can react effectively and how political measures should evolve as the pandemic subsides. In addition, the authors analyze how an efficient supranational insurance mechanism might look like.

EEAG Report on the European Economy 2020: Fair Taxation in a Mobile WorldReportTorben M. Andersen, Giuseppe Bertola, Clemens Fuest, Cecilia Garcia-Peñalosa, Harold James, Jan-Egbert Sturm et Branko Uroševic, Number 19, pp. 117, 2020

In the 1930s, countries fought destructive trade conflicts – now we have a similar situation, but the conflicts are taking place in the tax system. These conflicts arise out of the twin impacts of globalization and digitalization. Once upon a time, there was an implicit understanding of fairness in taxation, meaning how countries tax within their borders and how the tax burden is distributed. More specifically, companies and individuals were taxed based on their residence and consumption in the destination country. Such an approach worked while these events were mostly perceived as national. However, the world has changed, and in an increasingly globalized, digitalized, and mobile world, these understandings no longer appear to work smoothly, efficiently, and uncontentiously.