Can probability theory deal with entrepreneurship?

The Austrian theory of entrepreneurship emphasizes the importance of epistemic heterogeneity and the unlistability of the set of all possibilities. A similar concern with what has been called “the art of choosing the space of possibilities” is an important part of Bayesian model selection. Both Austrian and Bayesian authors view the common knowledge assumption as an unrealistic and unnecessary restriction. This coincidence of concerns leads to a joint theory of entrepreneurship. Three important benefits result from this merger: (1) the ability to use Itti & Baldi’s Bayesian theory of surprise to empirically measure radical surprise and improve the Betrand competition model as a consequence, (2) dealing with the unlistability problem, and (3) better understanding why the emergence of common knowledge is always the outcome of a social process rather than an inherent consequence of “rationality”.     

Does a college education cause better health and health behaviours?

In this article, we exploit the recent higher education expansion in China to apply a regression discontinuity method to identify the causal effects of higher education on health and health behaviours. We do not find causal effect of a college education on better smoking and drinking behaviours. For our selected measures of health, we do not find causal effect of a college education on better self-assessed health, less chance of having illness in the past 3 months and keeping normal body weight; however, we find that a college education could significantly reduce the probability of having hypertension.     

Costly information acquisition. Is it better to toss a coin?

This paper presents a strategic model of common value elections with endogenous information acquisition. It proves that majoritarian elections can fail to aggregate information when voters have heterogeneous skills and provides necessary and sufficient conditions for information aggregation. Inefficiencies can be partially corrected by limiting participation to the most competent citizens, a result which provides a rational foundation for epistocratic government.     

International or national implementers—Who is better? Evidence from a framing experiment

Behavioral economics has shown that changing small features in framing a context or action may drastically change behavior. A key factor characterizing most development interventions is the salience of either a local or an international implementer. Using the setup of an intervention conducted in Indonesia, we show that the study population in the Acehnese context exhibits higher levels of support for the project if the participation of international actors is highlighted. We find that previous experience with the respective actor is pivotal. Qualitative evidence suggests that internationals' perceived skills drive results, highlighting the importance of strengthened local capacities for positive experiences with local implementers. Overall, the study underlines the benefits of linking framing experiments to the actual experiences of respondents to generate insights into the real world.