The promotion of wellbeing: A primer for policymakers

There is growing international interest among policymakers in the promotion of wellbeing as an objective of public policy. Recent advances in the definition and measurement of wellbeing are giving rise to an increasingly detailed picture of the factors that determine how people think and feel about their lives. Patterns in reported wellbeing show markedly different development over time to measures of GDP per capita and life expectancy often used as proxies for wellbeing by policymakers. However, the concept of wellbeing remains poorly understood by many policymakers and much of the evidence base is extremely recent. I therefore review the current state of the literature on the definition, measurement, and determinants of wellbeing, and discuss some of its implications for public policy.This paper forms part of the work undertaken under ESRC grant RES-192-27-0014

Are World Leaders Loss Averse?

© Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo Gmb

Prospect theory and tax evasion: a reconsideration of the Yitzhaki puzzle

The standard expected utility (EUT) model of tax evasion predicts that evasion is decreasing in the marginal tax rate (the Yitzhaki puzzle). Recent literature shows cases in which incorporating prospect theory (PT) does and does not overturn the Puzzle. In a general environment that nests both PT and EUT preferences, we provide a detailed study of how the elements of PT affect the Puzzle. PT does not always reverse the Puzzle, hence we give and interpret conditions for when it does and does not. When allowing for stigma and/or variable audit probability, PT reverses the Puzzle in the same way and with the same limitations as does EUT, if equally augmented

Genome-wide association studies and the genetics of entrepreneurship

Contains fulltext : 88506.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

Voluntary disclosure schemes for offshore tax evasion

Tax authorities worldwide are implementing voluntary disclosure schemes to recover tax on offshore investments. The US and UK, in particular, have implemented such schemes in response to bulk acquisitions of information on offshore holdings, recent examples of which are the “Paradise” and “Panama” papers. Schemes offer affected investors the opportunity to make a voluntary disclosure, with reduced fine rates for truthful disclosure. Might such incentives, once anticipated by investors, simply encourage evasion in the first place? We characterize the investor/tax authority game with and without a scheme, allowing for the possibility that some offshore investment has legitimate economic motives. We show that a scheme increases net expected tax revenue, decreases illegal offshore investment and increases onshore investment, but could either increase or decrease legal offshore investment. The optimal disclosure scheme offers maximal incentives for truthful disclosure by imposing the minimum allowable rate of fine.ESRC (ES/S00713X/1, ES/K005944/1, ES/K001744/1

The implications of educational and methodological background for the career success of Nobel laureates: an investigation of major awards

Nobel laureates have achieved the highest recognition in academia, reaching the boundaries of human knowledge and understanding. Owing to past research, we have a good understanding of the career patterns behind their performance. Yet, we have only limited understanding of the factors driving their recognition with respect to major institutionalized scientific honours. We therefore look at the award life cycle achievements of the 1901–2000 Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine. The results show that Nobelists with a theoretical orientation achieved more awards than laureates with an empirical orientation. Moreover, it seems their educational background shapes their future recognition. Researchers educated in Great Britain and the US tend to attract more awards than other Nobelists, although there are career pattern differences. Among those, laureates educated at Cambridge or Harvard are more successful in Chemistry, those from Columbia and Cambridge excel in Physics, while Columbia educated laureates dominate in Physiology or Medicine