Equivalence Scales in an Intertemporal Setting with an Application to the Former West Germany

Equivalence scales provide answers to questions like how much a household with two children needs to spend compared to a couple to attain the same welfare level. These are important questions for child allowances, social benefits and to assess the cost of children over the life-cycle for example. We discuss equivalence scales in an intertemporal setting with uncertainty. To estimate equivalence scales we use a panel from German households (GSOEP) containing subjective data on satisfaction with life and satisfaction with income to represent the welfare level. Because satisfaction is measured on a discrete scale we use limited dependent variable models for panel data in estimation. Using satisfaction with life data we find that larger households do not need any additional income to be as satisfied as a couple. Using satisfaction with income, however, yields equivalence scales that increase with household size.     

Komplexität erfolgreich steuern — 27. Österreichischer Controllertag in Wien

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

A generalization of Condorcet’s Jury Theorem to weighted voting games with many small voters

We extend Condorcet’s Jury Theorem (Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pluralité des voix. De l’imprimerie royale, 1785) to weighted voting games with voters of two kinds: a fixed (possibly empty) set of ‘major’ voters with fixed weights, and an ever-increasing number of ‘minor’ voters, whose total weight is also fixed, but where each individual’s weight becomes negligible. As our main result, we obtain the limiting probability that the jury will arrive at the correct decision as a function of the competence of the few major players. As in Condorcet’s result the quota q = 1/2 is found to play a prominent role. I wish to thank Maurice Koster, Moshé Machover, Guillermo Owen and two anonymous referees for helpful comments.     

Background Risk and the Performance of Insurance Markets under Adverse Selection

Background risk can influence the performance of insurance markets that must deal with adverse selection when applicants are risk vulnerable, since they are more averse to bearing the insurable risk as a result of their exposures to background risk. We show that background risk always results in a lower deductible for the incentive constrained contract, and that a broader range of markets attains the stable sequential equilibrium cross-subsidized pair of separating contracts. We conclude that background risk always improves the performance of markets for coverage against (insurable) foreground risks that must deal with adverse selection. We also find, however, that these improvements are never sufficient to offset the cost to insureds of bearing the background risk.