John Riley On Harold Demsetz

/in /by
DwYG-IIXQAALNAK

Harold Demsetz

Professor Harold Demsetz will be greatly missed by all who were either his friends, his students, his colleagues, or, in my case, all three!

Harold grew up on the West Side of Chicago. He received his B.A. (1953) and MBA (1954) from the University of Illinois.  In 1958 he was awarded a Ph.D. in Economics from Northwestern University. He taught at the University of Michigan (1958–60), UCLA (1960–63), and the Chicago Business School (1963–71) before returning permanently to UCLA’s Economics Department.

Harold was a true giant of the profession. He was a leading figure in the Chicago school, and was one of the pioneers of the approach now called New Institutional Economics. He is a founder of the field of managerial economics. He expanded the theory of property rights now prevalent in law and economics. Even though Harold never employed game theory, he is a major figure in industrial organization through his writings on the theory of the firm, antitrust policy, and business regulation.

Over his lifetime, his papers garnered over 63,000 citations. This is a stunning number. Harold’s most famous paper (“Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization,” written with his colleague Armen Alchian for the American Economic Review in 1972), has over 18,000 citations. It is one of the most cited papers in all of economics.  His next nine most cited papers were all cited over 2000 times.  The titles of some of these papers provide a glimpse of the depth of his research on the theory of the firm:

I arrived at UCLA in 1973. Harold had just started UCLA’s first field focused research (the IO workshop) and a string of luminaries were invited to make their presentations.  It would not take many minutes before Harold would ask his first question and usually there was a follow-up question as well.  This was exciting stuff for students and faculty and as an assistant professor it was an essential part of each week.

Knowing that I was writing on the theory of signaling, Harold arranged for me to give a talk on the topic at the Chicago Business School. It was understood that surviving this was a necessary condition for earning his respect as an economist. A talk on competition with private information of course generated a huge amount of discussion at the workshop so I did not have to talk too much. It was a huge confidence boost for a young assistant professor!

Not surprisingly, Harold attracted a large number of students to his graduate classes and deeply influenced many of their doctoral dissertations.  He also had a strong influence on undergraduate education. Around 1980 he stimulated on ongoing lunchtime faculty club debate on how to best teach economics to undergraduates.  If the vast majority were seeking jobs in business, why were we not offering a program designed to prepare them to understand finance, theories of firm boundaries, the regulation of monopoly, and so on?  Not only would this be good for the students but it might also attract funding for the department.  In 1983, as a result of Harold’s determined leadership, a new major in Business Economics was born and it proved wildly popular.  Very high entry barriers were established and it quickly became a quasi-honors program for the economics undergraduates. Businesses took notice both in their recruiting efforts and in their financial support. In particular Arthur Anderson funded the Arthur Andersen UCLA Alumni Chair in Business Economics.  Of course Harold was by far the most distinguished candidate! Thirty-five years later, the Business Economics Major continues to attract exceptional students.

I will conclude with another vivid personal memory.  It begins with Harold carrying his sneakers as he headed down the elevator at lunchtime. “Off to run at the track!” he told me. I was invited to join him some day. I agreed and as we arrived at the starting point he said, “John this is your first time, so don’t feel you have to keep up with me.”  While it was a crisp pace I realized that I could keep up with my very senior (42 year old) colleague. I decided to do some training with the goal of being able to lap him in a 2 mile race. I completed my preparations and challenged him.  It seems stupid now! The day arrived.  I had a simple plan. Sprint the first lap, get a big lead and watch Harold give up. Away I flew. 440 yards later he was still right on my heels.  I was the one who knew I was going to fall short and so I did.  Harold always recalled this event with great satisfaction even though he admitted it was one of the hardest things he had done in his life!  But that day proved much more important. It was the beginning of a long and close relationship.  We were often competitive but always good friends.

By John Riley

Rodrigo Pinto Paper Makes “Best of 2018”

/in /by

Each year Quartz, a digital publication that’s part of Atlantic Media, publishes a list on Economics Research That Shaped Our World. This year include Professor Rodrigo Pinto’s paper on “Noncompliance as a Rational Choice”. This paper finds that growing up in an affluent neighborhood leads to better economic outcomes as an adult.

Nobel prize winner Jim Heckman writes: “Randomized control trials are considered the “gold standard” of economic evaluation research. Yet, many people assigned to treatment status do not comply. Noncompliance compromises simple interpretation of experimental evidence. Using basic economic choice theory, Pinto shows how to enhance the information from experiments. He applies his tools to the analysis of the Moving to Opportunity experiment, which offers low-income families the opportunities to move to better neighborhoods. Pinto shows that, contrary to influential claims based on results from naïve application of experimental methods, there are substantial impacts on neighborhoods of the outcomes of both the adults and children of families. His work greatly bolsters the evidence on the power of place and the ability of policy to reduce inequality within and across generations.”

Moritz Meyer-ter-Vehn appointed Editor of Review of Economic Design

/in /by

The UCLA Department of Economics is very happy to announce that Associate Professor Moritz Meyer-ter-Vehn has been appointed as an Editor for the Review of Economic Design!

The Review of Economic Design explores the art and science of inventing, analyzing, and testing economic, social, and political institutions and mechanisms.

The journal applies normative and positive economics and the strategic analysis of game theory, using novel ideas for designing and assembling diverse legal-economic instruments. Among these instruments are constitutions and other assignments of rights; mechanisms for allocation or regulation; tax and incentive schemes; contract forms; voting and other choice aggregation procedures; markets; auctions; and a variety of organizational forms.

Congratulations, Moritz!

Learning Dynamics in Social Networks

/in /by
mtv

Moritz Meyer-ter-Vehn

How do societies learn about the quality of innovations? How does the structure of social interactions affect their diffusion? These questions are critically important to modern economics, and to social science more broadly. They are relevant for the diffusion of new innovations, production techniques, and new business models. For example, consider how consumers learn about a new brand of electric car from their friends purchasing decisions. Or, how farmers who learn about new crops by observing neighbors’ planting choices. Or, how new financial products diffuse across villages in developing countries.

Over the last thirty years, researchers have studied such processes via sequential learning models and have identified important forces that impact whether or not societies eventually learn the truth. However, in the words of a recent survey: “A significant gap in our knowledge concerns short-run dynamics and rates of learning in these models.”

Professor Meyer-ter-Vehn’s research fills this gap. In “Learning Dynamics in Social Networks” (with Simon Board), he proposes a tractable model where the full learning dynamics are described by a differential equation, enabling him to study the effect of network structure on learning and diffusion. The model is simple, and is inspired by a classic “purchasing funnel”. First, each agent develops a need for a product at a random time (e.g. their car breaks down). Second, the agent sees which of her friends have already adopted. Third, she chooses whether to inspect the product (e.g. taking the car for a test-drive) and adopts it if the quality is high and it fits her needs.

Networks are very complicated objects, with each agent making inferences from the adoption decisions of their neighbors who, in turn, make inferences from them. To make progress on the problem, the paper first considers tree networks (e.g. a corporate hierarchy, or a large random network) and provides conditions under which all direct and indirect links contribute to an agent’s learning.  That is, an agent benefits if she has more friends, if her friends have more friends, and so on. This may sound obvious but, beyond trees, not all links are beneficial: An agent’s learning decreases when her neighbors are linked to each other, and when her neighbors learn from herself. Looking across all feasible networks, the paper shows that an agent’s favorite network is the directed star with herself at the center. These results also imply that learning is better in “decentralized” networks than “centralized” networks.

Professor Meyer-ter-Vehn’s research contributes to our understanding in three ways. First, it develops intuition for how network structure affects learning. Second, it can be used to structurally estimate diffusion in arbitrary, real-world networks while maintaining standard Bayesian rationality assumptions. Third, it informs policy experiments that affect network structure and the information of participants.

Ryan Snyder

/in /by

Ryan Snyder

Ryan Snyder graduated from UCLA with a bachelor’s degree in Economics, and later returned to earn a master’s degree in Urban Planning. As an undergraduate, Snyder was interested in a wide variety of subjects, from Geography to Anthropology.  The diversity of classes offered by the Economics major at UCLA gave him the freedom to study and explore all these subjects. Later, he would find out that his background in Economics gave him the perspective needed to critically analyze interdisciplinary problems from those fields and more.

As an undergraduate, Snyder was involved in the Office of Environmental and Consumer Affairs, a progressive, student-led organization. He focused on establishing a groundbreaking recycling program for the Daily Bruin. This experience taught him that the principles and ideas of economics directly applied to environmental issues. His background in the subject allowed him to not only identify key societal problems, but also develop innovative solutions for them. His time in the Office of Environmental and Consumer Affairs sparked his interest in alternative transportation options, particularly in the bicycle, which continues to be a central focus of his career.

In his senior year at UCLA, Snyder took an Introduction to Architecture and Urban Planning course taught by Harvey Perloff, a UCLA Dean and highly influential figure in modern urban planning. Perloff broadened the concept of urban planning to address environmental, social, and economic problems in addition to physical planning. This approach showed Snyder that Urban Planning was the intersection of all the subjects that he was interested in. Furthermore, it demonstrated that planning methods could become a powerful tool in solving the societal problems that Snyder cared about. Perloff’s class eventually convinced him to pursue a career in Urban Planning.

To kickstart a successful career in Urban Planning, Snyder earned a master’s degree in Urban Planning from UCLA. He then used his education, coupled with his passion for alternative modes of transportation, to promote active transportation in urban design. He started his career by working on transportation demand management, a field which focuses on understanding how people make their transportation decisions. He then became involved in bicycle and pedestrian planning, where he designed streets with important features such as adequate walking area, accommodations for people with disabilities, and spaces for bikes lanes.

A cornerstone in Snyder’s career was developing Los Angeles County’s Model Design Manual for Living Streets. His idea was straightforward yet pioneering—to create a modern framework for designing cities that incorporated many progressive aspects of urban planning. The project was a tremendous undertaking. He first organized a conference composed of leaders from several public interest groups and the best street design experts in the country. Together they collaborated on refining the implementation of his people-oriented design proposals. He then spent several months compiling the innovative ideas developed at the conference into a comprehensive design manual. After its publication, Snyder saw the potential for the manual to have a far-reaching impact in the field of urban planning. He shared the manual, not only with LA County, but also with cities across the nation—encouraging them to use it as a template for revamping their own urban developments. His project quickly flourished, and was adopted by many cities. Due to the project’s creative ideas and widespread implementation, Snyder received the National Planning Achievement Award for Best Practice from the American Planning Association.

Snyder has remained active in the UCLA and Westwood communities after his graduation. For years, he has taught a graduate course in Bicycle and Pedestrian planning at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. In order to improve the lives for future Bruins, Snyder ran and was recently elected to the North Westwood Neighborhood Council. He plans to apply his complete streets planning approach to make Westwood a more vibrant neighborhood.

Written by Kevin Kato

 

Former UCLA PhD Student Fights Extradition

/in /by

This piece originally appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

Political persecution drove former Colombian agriculture minister Andrés Felipe Arias to flee to the U.S. in 2014. The U.S. Embassy in Bogotá helped him escape, and when he arrived in Florida he immediately applied for asylum.

But if Mr. Arias thought he was safe, he wasn’t taking into account the U.S. Justice Department. For reasons that are hard to figure out, much less understand, Justice officials are working hard to send Mr. Arias back to Colombia.

Mr. Arias was once on track to succeed Álvaro Uribe, his political mentor, as president of Colombia. That’s when trumped up corruption charges emerged in the media. The Colombian Supreme Court, which is notoriously political, convicted the UCLA-trained economist of corruption after he had fled the country. He received a 17-year sentence in exile—from a country where the narco-terrorists known as the FARC enjoy amnesty these days. Mr. Arias was given no opportunity to appeal.

The Supreme Court—a longtime opponent of Mr. Uribe and his political allies—has continued to pursue Mr. Arias in the U.S. and under Colombian law it has the power to do so. In 2016 it asked the U.S. to extradite Mr. Arias, using a treaty that Colombia has never ratified. The Colombian Supreme Court has said it was never ratified; Mr. Uribe and former President Juan Manuel Santos have said there is no valid extradition treaty.

That should be enough for the U.S. to deny extradition and grant Mr. Arias’s asylum claim, which is making its way slowly through U.S. court. Meanwhile, Mr. Arias sits in a Florida jail. On Dec. 10 Colombia’s ambassador to the U.S., Francisco Santos, wrote the Justice Department Criminal Division requesting bail for Mr. Arias. The ambassador said Mr. Arias is not a flight risk and asked for the “rapid implementation of the steps necessary to ensure Mr. Arias may be released on bond, so that he can spend time with his wife and young children, especially during the holiday season.”

Colombia is the Justice Department’s client in this case, yet Justice is fighting the bail request. That makes no sense, but then neither does its determination to help the partisan Colombian judiciary fulfill what on the evidence is an unjust political prosecution.

Appeared in the December 18, 2018, print edition.

Lee Ohanian op-Ed on France in The Hill

/in /by

French President Emmanuel Macron’s ambitious goal of creating a vibrant and competitive French economy through major economic reforms came crashing down last week when riots over issues ranging from fuel taxes to inequality forced him to backpedal on some of his key reform ideas.

With an approval rating of around 20 percent and plummeting, Macron shifted from a market reformer to a populist in order to ameliorate angry voters.

Shortly after reducing taxes and regulations on businesses while at the same time weakening some of Europe’s strongest employment protection rules, Macron capitulated to protesters by increasing the minimum wage through a government-funded wage subsidy, eliminating taxation of overtime pay and by rescinding a tax increase on low-income pensioners.

It is doubtful that Macron could have retained his presidency by doing any less. The cost of this newfound populism will be about 0.4 percent of French GDP, which may strain France’s ability to maintain a fiscal deficit within the prescribed limits of the eurozone.

Macron’s proposals to strip away decades of sclerotic economic policies is spot on, and the recent protests clearly threaten his broader agenda of increasing the efficiency and competitiveness of France.

There is virtually universal agreement among economists that France desperately needs economic policy reforms to increase job creation and economic growth and to reduce unemployment that has stubbornly remained around 9 percent 10 years after the financial crisis.

In comparison, German unemployment is now 3.4 percent, down from roughly 8 percent during the financial crisis.

France has long been the poster child of economic policies that have depressed competition, raised costs, reduced productivity growth and that have created regulations that benefit very few while significantly harming many.

With youth unemployment hovering near 20 percent or more for most of the last 35 years, the last thing France should do is destroy job opportunities for young people. But this is exactly what France did for years through a morass of driving school regulations that raised the cost of driver training to a cost between $2,000 to $4,000.

Poorly-designed economic policies have had an enormous negative impact on the French economy. Since 2000, economic growth in France has averaged a shade over 1 percent per year, and is averaging only about 0.5 percent per year after adjusting for population growth.

The Heritage Foundation’s Economic Freedom index ranks France 71st, slightly ahead of Tonga and other very poor countries but behind Albania, which is not exactly the pinnacle of economic success, having recently borrowed $400 million from the International Monetary Fund to shore up its economy.

Punitive tax policies and poor economic performance have led many of France’s best and brightest to leave. In 2017, Macron campaigned for the presidency in London, of all places, which is home to 300,000 French citizens, more than the number who live in the French regions of Bordeaux or Nantes.

Today’s grossly inadequate economic performance is inconceivable when viewed from the perspective of France’s former economic heights. Between World War II and the mid-1970s, France was one of the world’s most successful economies.

Real GDP growth averaged 5 percent per year at that time. Real GDP per person — the conventional measure of living standards — was doubling every 17 years. At today’s miniscule growth rate, it will take 140 years for French per capita real GDP to double.

Macron and his advisers now face the difficult task of convincing voters to trust market-based economic reforms that will require some short-term sacrifice in order to achieve higher long-run growth. France grew so quickly after World War II through the 1970s because the French chose to make those short-term sacrifices.

The share of output devoted to consumption fell substantially, and the share devoted to investment rose by 50 percent during France’s postwar economic renaissance. These investments significantly increased worker productivity and French competitiveness in the rapidly expanding global economy.

French workers, who today are perceived to enjoy more vacation time than workers in any other country, worked as much as 46 hours per week, and 50 weeks per year, in the 1950s. Today, the French work 40-percent less than they did back in the day, reflecting a smaller proportion of the population working, as well as a much shorter workweek.

This enormous decline in market work is not because today’s French workers value leisure more than their grandparents. Rather, it is because tax rates are much higher than when their grandparents worked, and these higher taxes have depressed the incentive to work.

To restart his reform program that includes reforming the complicated French pension system as well as reducing government spending, Macron must regain the confidence of French voters for them to accept the short-term economic sacrifices and dislocations that will ultimately create higher economic growth.

With Macron’s economic reforms in place, French GDP growth could increase from its current rate of 1 percent per year to 3 percent per year for several years.

It has been nearly two generations since France offered its workers and businesses a vibrant and flexible market economy. Most French voters have never lived in such an economy. Some are skeptical whether they will benefit from Macron’s reforms, and others simply don’t know.

Macron’s ability to govern France and to implement his economic reforms no longer depends on the quality of his economic ideas. Rather it depends on his skills as a salesman of those ideas. And if Macron succeeds, France can look forward to a much brighter economic future.

 

 

California Policy Lab Awarded $1.2M UC Multicampus Research Grant

/in /by

Berkeley–The California Policy Lab (CPL) was awarded a $1.2 million grant from the University of California’s Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives to leverage experts across the
UC system to tackle complex problems that include homelessness and designing education and training to meet workforce needs.

“With this grant, new scholars will provide expertise needed for projects that agency partners value,” said California Policy Lab Berkeley Faculty Director Jesse Rothstein. “These efforts are
all about helping the state strengthen its policy development, policy analysis, and research capacity.”

“We are thrilled to receive this award,” said CPL UCLA Faculty Director Till von Wachter. “The grant enables us to form a statewide network of scholars that will combine forces to increase the
Lab’s impact on the state’s most pressing social issues. It also provides students with experience in applied research.” Though this new grant, the Lab will expand beyond its original sites at UCLA and UC Berkeley to bring in new faculty at UC Davis, UC Irvine, and UC San Francisco. Over time, the Lab intends to work with faculty at all nine UC campuses.

The project pairs interdisciplinary research expertise of UC faculty with California state and county agency expertise and administrative data. The collaboration will support a range of projects in the areas of homelessness, workforce training, and beyond, including:

● A study aimed at identifying events and characteristics that may predict near-term homelessness, based on linked data from county health, criminal justice, housing, and welfare systems. This will support agency efforts to prevent homelessness, which will then be evaluated for effectiveness.

● Examining the impact of several adult vocational education and workforce training programs on subsequent employment and earnings. This will lead to success metrics for each program and identify gaps in access to effective services.

In the two years since its inception at UCLA and Berkeley, the Lab has seen incredible success conducting policy-relevant research across California government agencies, thanks to partnerships with public agencies that overcome data silos.

CPL has established itself as a trusted research partner for Los Angeles, Sonoma, and San Francisco counties, working with agencies on the front line of addressing the homelessness crisis. It established data sharing agreements covering over a dozen county agencies in these three locations, including medical, mental health, criminal justice, social service, and homeless management information systems. CPL has developed similar partnerships with a range of state agencies with responsibility for social services, higher education, and anti-poverty programs.

About the California Policy Lab
The California Policy Lab is a new University of California initiative, begun in 2017 at UC Berkeley and UCLA, designed to create data-driven insights for the public good. CPL’s mission is to partner with California’s state and local governments to generate scientific evidence that solves California’s most urgent problems, including homelessness, poverty, crime, and education inequality. The Lab facilitates close working partnerships between policymakers and researchers to help evaluate and improve public programs through empirical research and technical assistance.

Learn more at: http://www.capolicylab.org/

CPL Welcomes Members from Law Enforcement and Research Communities for Conference on Policing Innovation and Reform

/in /by

On Friday, November 30th, the California Policy Lab (CPL) hosted colleagues from the law enforcement and research communities for a conference on policing innovation and reform. Over the course of the day, participants heard from local and national law enforcement leaders, researchers, practitioners, and subject matter experts about the challenges of implementing policing reform on the ground, how they measure success, and how they develop evidence to guide future policy decisions.

The day began with opening remarks from CPL-UCLA’s Executive Director, Janey Rountree, and UCLA’s Dean of Social Sciences, Darnell Hunt. Both spoke about the critical need for partnerships between practitioners and researchers to catalyze innovation in policing. Their comments set the stage for the conference’s first panel, which highlighted examples of successful partnerships, entitled “Collaborative Research Partnerships: Leveraging Data and Science to Inform Policing Innovations”.

During the first panel, participants heard first from Chief Jonathan Lewin, of the Chicago Police Department’s Bureau of Technical Services. Chief Lewin discussed the transformational impact of Chicago’s Strategic Decision Support Centers—rooms in which police officers and analysts work together to use insights from data analysis to target resources for preventing gun violence. The Cook County State Attorney’s Office also shared their experience partnering with the research community, by discussing the launch of a new data portal to advance transparency and the creation of “Hacking for Justice” trainings. Participants also heard from Kristen Mahoney, Deputy Director for Policy at the Department of Justice (DOJ)’s Bureau of Justice Assistance. Deputy Director Mahoney shared lessons from DOJ’s Public Safety Partnerships program, including the importance of exchange programs for law enforcement to learn about new tools for improving crime fighting. Finally, CPL affiliates Dr. Steven Raphael of UC Berkeley and Dr. Aaron Chalfin of the University of Pennsylvania shared findings from their research on foot beats in San Francisco, and police pursuits in Los Angeles, respectively.

Following the first panel, a distinguished group of Police Chiefs assembled during for a lunchtime session about the challenges and opportunities encountered by leaders in the field of policing. Superintendent Eddie Johnson from the Chicago Police Department spoke about strategies for improving morale and building community trust, emphasizing the importance of showing personnel you care through action, and of taking time to listen to divergent perspectives. Chief Anne Kirkpatrick of the Oakland Police Department also spoke about the role of leadership in strengthening community trust, noting for the audience that “Leadership is about followership. People follow leaders. They obey rank, but rank is not leadership”. Additionally, Deputy Chief of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), Sean Malinowski spoke about LAPD’s experience working with CPL on quick turnaround projects that have a meaningful impact on the Department’s policies and operations.

The second session of the day focused on building for the future, highlighting strategies for improving hiring, training, and officer support. The session opened with a presentation by Lizzie Peters of the London Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC). Peters spoke about supporting the professionalization of policing, including MOPAC’s efforts to put evidence-based practices into action. Dr. Jyoti Belur of the UCL Institute for Global City Policing also discussed best practices in police training, and in particular, efforts to ensure that police departments are representative of the communities they serve. CPL-UCLA’s own Nefara Riesch presented next on her research with CPL Affiliate Dr. Elizabeth Linos. Their research on LAPD recruitment demonstrated that applying insights from behavioral science to communications with candidates can make an impact on persistence in police hiring processes—an important finding as departments focus on recruiting and retaining the next generation of talent. Additionally, participants heard from Superintendent Richard Smith of the London Metropolitan Police Services about his work building the case for direct entry into leadership roles in British policing. Dr. Steven Sultan of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department provided final remarks and shared his perspective on the unique benefits of embedding psychological services within law enforcement agencies.

The day’s final session built on the sessions preceding it, with a panel on strategies to measure, improve, and earn public trust and cooperation. Superintendent Jon Simpson of the London Metropolitan Police Services discussed how surveying community members can improve customer service in policing, through their “Rate Your Police Constable” program. Next, Sujeet Rao of Elucd shared his work using technology to measure public sentiment in partnership with police departments. Following this, participants heard from Dr. Emily Owens of the University of California, Irvine about promising findings from her research on the impact of supervision on reducing officer use of force. Additionally, Dr. Rebecca Neuster of the Vera Institute discussed Compstat360, a tool used by law enforcement that integrates data-driven crime monitoring with community needs and feedback. Finally, San Francisco’s District Attorney, George Gascon, offered his views on how police departments can better empathize with community members, by understanding how certain actions might be perceived as oppressive.

The conference concluded with remarks from LAPD Police Chief Mike Moore, who emphasized that “academic relationships are what we [law enforcement] need”. Indeed, the sessions throughout the day made this case, showcasing the tremendous potential inherent in partnerships between the research and law enforcement communities. Given the vital work done by law enforcement every day, and the critical lens through which this work is viewed, this type of collaboration is now more important and urgent than ever before.

Are banks now safer?

/in /by

UCLA Department of Economics Professors Andrew Atkeson and Pierre-Olivier Weill, along with UCLA Anderson School of Management professor Andrea Eisfeldt, and former UCLA Ph.D student Adrien D’Avernas, co-authored a paper for the 33rd Annual Conference on Macroeconomics (April 12-13, 2018).  Their paper, Government Guarantees and the Valuation of American Banks, is currently featured on the National Bureau of Economic Research website.  Pierre-Olivier Weill introduces the material in a brief interview also featured on the website.