An empirical investigation of interregional production relations and comparative advantage in US manufacturing, 1960–70

Hypothesized differences in mean changes in shares of European Community (EC) import markets over the period 1976-84 are tested for each of 36 less-developed countries. Means are calculated for cases in which MFN tariffs are re-established and for cases in which duty-free treatment is restored under the EC generalized system of preferences. They are compared with means for cases in which tariffs remained constant. We attempt to control for both product-specific and cyclical influences on imports. In contrast to some previous results, our findings suggest that denial (restoration) of preferential treatment, i.e. a tariff increase (decrease), has its expected negative (positive) effect.     

The multi-market firm, transportation costs, and the separation of the output and allocation decisions

Despite the documented importance of transport costs for firmswith sales in geographically separated markets, theoreticalanalyses typically ignore such costs. This paper analyzes theeffects of transport costs for a risk averse, competitive firmselling a single good in a domestic (certain) and a foreign(uncertain) market, and shows that these effects are asymmetric.The effects on total output and the inter-market allocationof output depend on the behavior of marginal domestic transportcosts, but are largely independent of the form of the foreigntransport cost function. Moreover, regardless of the latter,if marginal transport costs in the domestic market are constant,the firm's total output is independent of its attitude towardsrisk and the parameters of the risky market. This suggests thatthe firm's activity can be insulated from foreign uncertaintiesby government policies that focus on the shape of the domestictransportation cost function.     

ExpertLens: A system for eliciting opinions from a large pool of non-collocated experts with diverse knowledge

The complexity of policy decision-making raises the need to elicit opinions from large and heterogeneous groups of stakeholders with broad and diverse sets of expertise. Existing options for elicitation include small face-to-face panels of experts by using the Nominal Group Technique (NGT), large Delphi panels whose members do not interact with each other face-to-face, and crowdsourcing, which involves an open call for input issued to a large community of people. In an attempt to close the gap between the practical needs of policy makers and the methodological challenges associated with eliciting opinions of large, diverse, and distributed groups, we have developed a new online elicitation system and methodology called ExpertLens. By optimizing the direct interactions of NGT with the larger number of Delphi participants and the wisdom of “selected crowds,” our approach is designed to save on the costs associated with traditional expert panels, while increasing accuracy in elicitation by reducing the potential for group process losses that can occur in large, diverse, and non-collocated panels whose members interact via asynchronous online discussion boards. The ExpertLens approach is iterative, does not require participants to develop consensus, and determines what the group “thinks” by statistically analyzing data collected in all rounds of the elicitation. This paper describes the ExpertLens system and methodology, briefly discusses recent ExpertLens trials, provides conceptual arguments for why it is an appropriate model for eliciting expert opinions, illustrates its main components and analytics by using an infrastructure investment example, and discusses a research agenda for testing the underlying tenets of the ExpertLens approach.     

Managing platform architectures and manufacturing processes for nonassembled products

The article presents methods for defining product platforms and measuring business performance in process intensive industries. We first show how process intensive product platforms can be defined using the products and processes of a film manufacturer. We then present an empirical method for understanding the dynamics of process intensive platform innovation, allocating engineering and sales data to specific platform and product development efforts within a product family. We applied this method to a major product line of a materials manufacturer. We gathered ten years of engineering and manufacturing cost data and allocated these to successive platforms and products, and then generated R&D performance measures. These data show the dynamic of heavy capital spending relative to product engineering as one might expect in a process intensive industries. The data also show how derivative products can be leveraged from underlying product platforms and processes for nonassembled products. Embedded within these data are strategies for creating reusable subsystems (comprising components, materials, etc.) and common production processes. Hard data on the degree to which subsystems and processes are shared across different products frequently are typically not maintained by corporations for the duration needed to understand the dynamics of evolving product families. For this reason, we developed and applied a second method to assess the degree of reuse of subsystems and processes. This method asks engineering managers to provide subjective ratings on an ordinal scale regarding the use of technology and processes from one product to the next in a cumulative manner. We find that high levels of reuse generally indicate that a product family was developed with a platform discipline. We applied this measure of platform intensity to two product lines of integrated circuits from another large manufacturer. We used this method to gather approximately ten years of information for each product family. Upon analysis, one product family showed substantial platform discipline, emphasizing a common architecture and processes across specific products within the product line. The other product family was developed with significantly less sharing and reuse of architecture, components, and processes. We then found that the platform centric product family outperformed the latter along a number of performance dimensions over the course of the decade under examination.     

Domestic and Foreign Sales When Prices in Both Markets are Uncertain

This paper obtains comparative static results for a firm that sells a single output domestically and abroad when prices in both markets are uncertain. Results are obtained for both constant absolute risk aversion and for Ross decreasing absolute risk aversion, using a diagrammatic analysis which exploits the properties of expected marginal utility contours. The results depend crucially on whether foreign and domestic sales are net substitutes or complements. The model is more complex and yields fewer unambiguous results – particularly in the case of substitutes – than when there is price uncertainty in only one market.     

The choice between multiplicative and additive production uncertainty

When modeling output uncertainty, the multiplicative specification is consistently chosen over the additive form, despite the latter being arguably intuitively more obvious. The rationale for this seems to be that when production risk is the only source of uncertainty, additive uncertainty does not reduce output below the certainty level, while multiplicative uncertainty does. We show that, in the absence of hedging, this result is drastically modified when there is simultaneous price and output uncertainty. In this situation the theoretical implications of the two specifications are sufficiently similar to preclude any a priori choice between the two. Thus the choice between the additive and multiplicative formulations may be dictated by how each performs in empirical analyses.     

Introductory honors economics on the Web

Economics 304KH and 304LH at The University of Texas at Austin are introductory honors economics courses. Our goal was to provide students with more advanced material than available in introductory textbooks, such as a discussion of microeconomics based on one‐dimensional calculus and a survey of macroeconomics based on economic models. The supplemental material consists of Web course notes, on‐line quizzes, simulation and data modules and group interactive modules. This paper focuses on the development of Web economic course materials. We discuss the difficulties of programming mathematical instructional material in HTML and the coming solution in XML, JavaScript, and Java. The effectiveness of the on‐line course materials are also evaluated based on student responses. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Economic analysis of BRAF gene mutation testing in real world practice using claims data: costs of single gene versus panel tests in patients with lung cancer

Aims: To assess the time to BRAF testing, compare the characteristics of tested vs not-tested patients, and describe the costs for sequential vs next-generation sequencing (NGS) BRAF testing.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer after December 1, 2013 were identified from two US claims databases; their characteristics were assessed during the 12 months before diagnosis (index date). Testing modalities were analyzed from the index date to end of continuous health plan enrollment or data availability (December 2015), based on combinations of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) procedure codes. Time to BRAF testing was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Costs were analyzed from a payer’s perspective.

Results: A total of 28,011 patients newly-diagnosed with lung cancer were identified. Of them, 1,260 (4.5%) were tested for BRAF: 3.2% and 4.2% were tested at 6 and 12 months, respectively, after the index date. Compared to non-tested patients, tested patients were younger (58.3 vs 65.3 years; p?<?.001), had a lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (2.8 vs 2.9; p?=?.005), and a higher proportion had metastases (70.9% vs 43.4%; p?<?.001). In 76.0% of cases, BRAF was tested along with KRAS. BRAF was tested using NGS in 6.6% of cases. The average reimbursed amounts for the 10 most common CPT code combinations were $207–$2,074. Using the average costs of individual mutation tests, the total cost of sequential testing comprising KRAS, EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF tests was $3,763 ($464, $696, $1,070, $1,127, and $406, respectively), that of NGS was $2,860.

Limitations: Claims data did not include BRAF test results.

Conclusions: Among patients newly-diagnosed with lung cancer, 4.5% were tested for BRAF. Tested patients were younger and had a lower comorbidity burden, but more advanced disease. While reimbursed amounts varied greatly based on combinations of testing procedures, NGS testing was associated with cost savings compared to sequential testing of individual mutations.