The California Policy Lab at UCLA

Till von Wachter

Earlier this month, Professor Till von Wachter was awarded a $5.5 million renewal grant by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation for continued funding of the California Policy Lab (CPL) at UCLA, of which he serves as Faculty Director. The grant is shared with UC Berkeley (UCB), which houses a sister lab, the California Policy Lab at UCB. The renewal grant funds the California Policy Lab through April 2020.

The objectives of the California Policy Lab are to generate new, scientific evidence that is at the frontier of academic research and to help state and local government partners tackle issues such as homelessness, poverty, crime, and education inequality.  Though government agencies often collect substantial administrative data about their programs and the people they serve, they often lack the resources, data infrastructure, and rigorous research expertise they need to evaluate success and inform future policy decisions. At the same time, despite extensive expertise, academic researchers often lack access to the necessary data or policy discussions. CPL helps fill these gaps by bringing experts from the country’s top public universities and a secure platform for data and policy analysis to provide empirical analysis that exploit the power of administrative data and data science to help address some of the key pressing questions facing policymakers and society in Los Angeles, California, and beyond.

The California Policy Lab began as a pilot program in 2017, funded by a $1 million grant from the Arnold Foundation for each campus. The current grant is considerably larger than the initial grant, with UCLA receiving $2.85 million of the $5.5 million grant. The expanded grant reflects the confidence the Arnold Foundation has in the California Policy Lab’s research. “The California Policy Lab is taking on projects with real-world impact,” said Michelle Welch, the Director for Results Driven Government, a branch of the Arnold Foundation. “If the lab is successful in using data and state-of-the-art research tools to move the needle on important issues like homelessness, fewer people will be sleeping on the streets at night.”

Professor von Wachter has helped spearhead the Lab’s labor and homelessness research, developing partnerships with state and local government entities like the City and County of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, and the Employment Development Department. In addition to serving as the Faculty Director of CPL, von Wachter also serves as Associate Dean for Research for the Social Science Division and Director of the Federal Statistical Research Data Center at UCLA.

The Lab also relies upon the expertise and supports the work of several UCLA faculty members. Moshe Buchinsky, Professor of Economics, serves as a CPL Faculty Affiliate and has helped to oversee the Lab’s homelessness research. Professor Buchinsky, who is also serving as Vice Chair and Director of Graduate Studies, currently leads a project for CPL on the effects of homelessness and temporary housing on the outcomes of local neighborhood and housing prices. Professors Ed Leamer from the Anderson School, Sarah Reber and Wes Yin from the Luskin School of Public Policy, and Norweeta Milburn from the Department of Psychiatry, among others, also cooperate with the California Policy Lab.

Since its inception, CPL has played a growing role in contributing to the body of evidence on homelessness solutions. Professors von Wachter, Buchinsky, and Milburn currently serve as members of the Homelessness Policy Research Institute, a group of over 30 policymakers and local and national researchers who design and coordinate actionable research to end homelessness in Los Angeles. Additionally, CPL is working predict first time homelessness and persistent high cost utilization of services based on machine learning algorithms, to analyze the performance and utilization of emergency homeless shelters in the LA Continuum of Care, to examine racial equity in the provision of homelessness services, and to evaluate a new housing subsidy. Finally, the Lab will evaluate the impact of a family homelessness prevention program implemented in Los Angeles called “Solid Ground”. Solid Ground offers services to families who are at risk of becoming homeless that are designed to stabilize their housing and prevent them from falling into homelessness.

From day one, CPL has also been involved in important labor related research partnerships, including with the City of Los Angeles and the State to evaluate the impact of increasing minimum wages; with California’s Employment Development Department to study workforce development and unemployment insurance; and with Los Angeles County to study workforce training for less advantaged workers. Together with its partner lab at UC Berkeley, CPL has also pursued a series of important partnerships and projects on criminal justice related areas, including with the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

With the additional funding provided by the Arnold Foundation Grant, the California Policy Lab will continue expanding its ability to support cutting edge research based on administrative data and to use this data to evaluate the efficacy of government programs designed to combat California’s most pressing issues, like workforce training or homelessness. The provision of this grant and the efforts of the California Policy Lab, its faculty affiliates, and its staff demonstrate the firm commitment of UCLA’s academic community to not only improve our understanding of the great challenges of our time, but also to work towards their resolution.

April Franco

April_Franco

April Franco

Entrepreneurship and academic research are two words that are rarely used in the same context. However, Dr. April Franco’s illustrious career as a research economist seamlessly blends these two worlds together, producing some of the most innovative research in the fields of management science, industrial organization and applied game theory. Furthermore, her journey through the meandering path of academia provides us with insights that are indispensable to anyone staring down a similar path.

Franco’s transition into economics hints at her entrepreneurial mindset. As an undergraduate majoring in Economics and Philosophy, Franco thought that law school was her obvious calling.

Having worked part-time at a jewelry store frequented by several lawyers, Franco got the chance to ask them questions about a career in law. She learnt that the field of law is very adversarial, one picks (or is assigned) a side and is continually battling the other side. This was not something which April wanted in a career. Around the same time, she got an opportunity, through the various avenues that UCLA Economics offers, to conduct research under the supervision of the renowned Dr. Jack Hirshleifer. She read, among other papers, the work by Kahneman and Tversky in the Quarterly Journal of Economics. In her work and readings, she realized that the process of research appealed to her. She enjoyed how research focused on understanding and discussing existing ideas, then using the existing ideas to push the frontier of human knowledge. She discovered that although there is competition in research, the competition is a race to truth and not a battle against your colleagues. After a summer as a RA at UC Berkeley, she was certain that a career in research was the right choice for her.

Franco’s research career is too extensive to summarize in one article. However, one thing her work has in common is that it focuses on questions which she believes are important to ask and intellectually intriguing. When asked to choose her opus magnus, she wryly replied that it is like being asked to choose amongst one’s children. Nonetheless, she obliged our request. She talked about her job market paper which was among the first papers to explore the origins of entrepreneurs. Hitherto, most economic papers argued that if there is an opportunity for strictly positive profits, new firms would enter the industry. However, the literature did not explore where these entrepreneurs came from. “It was as if they came from ether”, jokes Franco. Her paper, which she wrote in collaboration with Dr. Darren Filson, argued that one of the major source of new firms was employee spin-outs. That is employees quitting their jobs to start independent firms that operate in the same industry as their former employers. In the age of the PayPal mafia this may seem rather clear, but her paper, backed with evidence from the hard drive industry, was groundbreaking and pioneered the literature in this field.

Throughout her research career, she has further explored the question of employee spin-outs. She has also explored several other questions such as the impact of overconfidence in management and questions relating to intra-firm organization.  One of the hardest tasks in research is coming up with meaningful and impactful research questions. Franco believes that her undergraduate education in economics has helped her in developing research questions, remarking that North American universities, such as UCLA, are exceptionally good at developing the skills necessary to conjure research questions. As she recalls, during graduate school several of her classmates had gone to universities that focused on fostering technical skills. During her first year, when the classes were very technical, Franco felt as if she was playing catch up. However, once she learned the technical skills, it was her ability to use the technical skills in asking and answering impactful questions that pushed her career forward.

Franco remarks that undergraduates considering a career in academia should consider both the intellectual freedom that academia affords and the fact that it requires one to be entrepreneurial and self-motivated. If one decides to pursue a career in research, Franco’s advice is to focus on the fundamentals. She recommends taking challenging mathematics classes, learning how to use computers for analysis (like R and Python), and developing the ability to write effectively. These skills coupled with the insatiable desire to work on questions will no doubt bolster a career in research.

By Harsh Gupta.

UCLA Economics Graduates gets Earnings Boost

Earnings data from UCLA shows that UCLA Business Economics and Economics graduates earn 45% and 30% more than average UC graduates two years after graduation, and that these differences persist. For example, 10 years after graduation, the median Business Economics student earns $113k, while a quarter of the class earn more than $158k.

This speaks to the determination of our students, and the power of economics training.

Earnings

Social Enterprise Academy Venture Showcase

The UCLA Department of Economics, along with UCLA Alumni Career Programs and The Academies for Social Entrepreneurship hosted the eighth annual UCLA Social Enterprise Academy Venture Showcase & Symposium.

This event featured three teams of students representing local community organizations pitching the business ventures they developed in our social enterprise courses Econ 173A and 173B for $30,000 in cash awards.

The video here  shows an example of a pitch made by one of the teams in this year’s academy in the preliminary round of our venture competition together with the feedback from judges in this first round of competition.

Giorcelli, Meckel and Nocke become members of the NBER

Congratulations to Professors Michela Giorcelli, Katherine Meckel and Volker Nocke, who became members of the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research. Giorcelli is a Faculty Research Fellow at the “Development of American Economy” group, Meckel is a Faculty Research Fellow in programs on “Public Economics” and “The Economics of Children”, and Nocke is a Research Associate of the “Industrial Organization” group.

Breaking the Glass Ceiling: The Effect of Board Quotas on Female Labor Market Outcomes in Norway

By Adriana lleras-Muney

In late 2003, Norway passed a law mandating 40 percent representation of each gender on the board of public limited liability companies. The primary objective of this reform was to increase the representation of women in top positions in the corporate sector and decrease the gender disparity in earnings within that sector. We document that the women appointed to these boards post-reform were observably more qualified than their female predecessors along many dimensions, and that the gender gap in earnings within boards fell substantially. However, we see no robust evidence that the reform benefited the larger set of women employed in the companies subject to the quota. Moreover, the reform had no clear impact on highly qualified women whose qualifications mirror those of board members but who were not appointed to boards. Finally, we find mixed support for the view that the reform affected the decisions of young women. While the reform was not accompanied by any change in female enrollment in business education programs, we do see some improvements in labor market outcomes for young women with graduate business degrees in their early career stages; however, we observe similar improvements for young women with graduate science degrees, suggesting this may not be due to the reform. Overall, seven years after the board quota policy fully came into effect, we conclude that it had very little discernible impact on women in business beyond its direct effect on the women who made it into boardrooms.

Read full paper here

 

Lee Ohanian on Solar Roof Mandates

Professor Lee Ohanian writes in today’s San Francisco Chronicle that “California’s solar rooftop mandate doesn’t make economic sense”.

This month, the California Energy Commission voted to require that almost all new California housing include rooftop solar panels. The commission estimates that after three years, the solar mandate will have the same effect on carbon reduction as eliminating 115,000 cars. But this represents only 0.8 percent of California’s registered motor vehicles. With California building about 100,000 homes each year, this relatively small reduction in carbon emissions may increase new home construction costs by as much as $9 billion.

California’s rush into renewables is premature.

This unprecedented mandate will not reduce carbon emissions significantly because California electricity generation is powered primarily by natural gas, which produces less carbon than cars. Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gases in California, producing more than twice as much as electricity generation.

Addressing the state’s failure to build roads and houses is much more important in reducing carbon emissions than turning every new house rooftop into an electrical generator.

There are fewer miles of serviceable roads in California today than in the 1990s, which means that California drivers burn tons of fossil fuel while sitting in traffic. Los Angeles drivers spend about 150 percent more time in traffic than the average U.S. driver, which costs L.A. drivers about $3,500 per year.

A related problem is that California’s housing supply does not come close to keeping up with demand. California’s housing shortage has increased home prices enormously in coastal cities and is causing a growing number of workers to commute long distances from locations with relatively affordable housing, such as the Central Valley, to work in areas with high-paying jobs, including Silicon Valley, the Bay Area and Los Angeles. In 2016, 471,000 drivers commuted to LosAngeles daily from another county, and California is home to the three U.S. cities with the greatest share of workers commuting at least three hours per day.

The new solar rooftop mandate will also raise housing and business costs, and California’s disproportionate bet on solar energy will probably have the unintended consequence of reducing future energy reliability and increase the possibility of brownouts.

Solar energy has the major drawback that its production peaks when residential demand is low, and it plummets late in the day when demand peaks. This gross imbalance between supply and demand leads to bizarre market outcomes, including California producing so much power at midday that it pays Arizona to take the excess production to prevent an electrical grid overload.

The large imbalance between supply and demand also stresses conventionally generated electricity production, which operates at inefficient low levels during midday, but then must increase production extremely rapidly in the late afternoon. As California increases its solar power share, this tightrope act of matching supply and demand becomes increasingly complicated and will tend to increase brownouts as operators struggle to keep up with demand.

The cost of cutting carbon with rooftop solar is high. The Energy Commission estimates that the solar mandate will raise construction costs by about $9,500 per home. Cost estimates by builders, however, which include the mandate’s additional requirement of more efficient appliances, lighting, windows and insulation, are $30,000 in higher constructioncosts. But even the commission’s low estimate drives up the already high cost of California housing, where only 30 percent of households can afford the median home price of nearly $540,000. This will push even more Californians further away from large job centers, increase commuting times and further increase carbon emissions from autos.

The Energy Commission counters that lower future energy costs would more than offset their estimate of additional construction costs. But if solar panels, extra insulation, thermal windows and highly energy-efficient appliances and lighting were such a great deal, then consumers would demand them, and builders would build them without any state arm-twisting. The commission seems to have chosen a mandate because consumers don’t value these energy-saving items nearly as much as the commission thinks they should.

Sensibly adopting renewables on such a major scale requires waiting until new technology is developed that can feasibly store renewable energy. Waiting would also allow California to assess alternative options to reduce carbon, including emerging technologies that capture carbon, and that turn carbon into ethanol, as well as consider further development of large-scale solar power generation, which generates electricity at about half the cost of rooftop solar.

In the meantime, it is straightforward for California to reduce carbon — build more roads, build more houses, and enjoy not only less carbon but more economic growth, lower housing costs and more time outside of our cars.

Bill Simon receives My Last Lecture Award

The following is from today’s Daily Bruin.

UCLA professor and 2002 California gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon often dresses up as famous economic figures like J.P. Morgan for his classes.

“A couple years after I ran for governor, a friend of mine asked me, what are you going to do now?” Simon said. “I said I’d like to get dressed up like Julius Caesar and go in front of a bunch of freshmen, slam my helmet on the table and say ‘veni, vidi, vici’ – I came, I saw, I conquered. If they start laughing, maybe I’m in the right place.”

Simon, a professor in the department of economics, received the My Last Lecture Award at a ceremony in De Neve Auditorium on Tuesday. The award, created by the UCLA Alumni Scholars Club in 2010, honors a student-nominated professor and gives them the chance to lecture on a topic they would want to talk about if it were their last lecture on Earth.

Simon structured his lecture around nine lessons that he’s learned in his life, from human nature to career advice, and talked about a range of topics, such as the importance of exercise, Mark Twain quotes and the role of self-deprecation when presenting.

Simon established a career in investment banking and ran for governor of California in 2002, but realized his passion for education after he lost. He said he became a professor on a whim, at the suggestion of a friend, but quickly grew to enjoy teaching.

“It started feeling really great, and I really enjoyed it,” Simon said. “The student evaluations came back and they were good, and one thing led to the next. (Teaching) has gone from a passion to a calling.”

Simon said he had to get used to preparing for class and learned new perspectives in economics from reading and putting together course material.

“Even (though) it’s something I’ve been doing for many years, I learned once again some things I knew once before and had forgotten, and (was exposed to) other new perspectives,” Simon said. “It’s been fun for me.”

He added he tries to teach students by using the mistakes and challenges he’s overcome in his own life as educational tools.

“I try to say to the students, in effect, don’t worry,” Simon said. “You are the future and you’re going to do great, and you’re going to make mistakes, but it can make you feel better if I can tell you about all the mistakes I’ve made, and all the mistakes that have been made in history.”

Students who have taken Simon’s classes said they appreciated how he connected with them and took the time to help develop their interests.

Michael Chen, a fourth-year economics student, said Simon’s courses have changed the way he views economics.

“One (phrase) that really resonated with me was, ‘Trees don’t grow to skies,’” Chen said. “An asset can look like a tree but it will have a reversion to the mean. I reflect on that whenever I look at the market.”

Chen said Simon engages students by learning personal details about them.

“He acted not only as a teacher but a mentor to me,” Chen said. “In a class of 30 or 40 students, (Simon) takes the time to know every student individually and tries to cater to their needs.”

Colin Connor, a third-year economics student, said he thinks Simon was selfless with his time and resources.

“Once, I asked him about something in a book that he had written and he just said, ‘Oh, I’ll just send you a copy,’” Connor said.

Nick Katzaroff, a fourth-year economics student, said he appreciated how personally engaged Simon was with his students.

“He was kind of like another dad, or a grandfather,” he said. “He would always ask how your family is doing and always wants your feedback. When you challenge his view, he will either be open to your view or research more about (the topic).”

Andrew Atkeson, a professor in the department of economics who has co-taught classes with Simon, said he thinks Simon is able to teach complicated economics concepts in an accessible and engaging manner.

“I think I’ve learned a lot about teaching in working with him, which has been a great pleasure for me,” Atkeson said. “A lot of times in economics, we present on a dry and technical level, but what we are discussing are human motivations.”

Simon said he feels indebted to the UCLA community and is grateful to have the opportunity to share his knowledge and resources with students.

“I’m a lucky guy,” he said. “It’s not often that at my age you stumble upon something that becomes a second career, and that’s exactly what happened to me.

Scarlett Wilson

Jay Lu wins Winter 2018 Scoville Teaching Award

We would like to congratulate Jay Lu for winning the Scoville Award for best undergraduate teaching in Winter 2018 for his class Econ 148 on Behavioral Economics.

Jay Lu

Behavioral economics is a subfield of economics that incorporates insights from psychology and other social sciences. The broad goal is to improve the realism of economic models by incorporating features such as aversion for losses, problems with self-control, or concern for others. The class reviews some of the standard assumptions made in economics, examines evidence on how human behavior systematically departs from these assumptions and explores alternative models of human decision-making in order to help improve economic analyses. This is Jay Lu’s third time winning this award.  Congratulations!