Does Information about Inequality and Discrimination in Early Child Care Affect Policy Preferences?
Henning Hermes, Philipp Lergetporer, Fabian Mierisch, Guido Schwerdt, Simon Wiederhold
IWH Discussion Papers,
Nr. 2,
2024
Abstract
We investigate public preferences for equity-enhancing policies in access to early child care, using a survey experiment with a representative sample of the German population (n ≈ 4, 800). We observe strong misperceptions about migrant-native inequalities in early child care that vary by respondents’ age and right-wing voting preferences. Randomly providing information about the actual extent of inequalities has a nuanced impact on the support for equity-enhancing policy reforms: it increases support for respondents who initially underestimated these inequalities, and tends to decrease support for those who initially overestimated them. This asymmetric effect leads to a more consensual policy view, substantially decreasing the polarization in policy support between under- and overestimators. Our results suggest that correcting misperceptions can align public policy preferences, potentially leading to less polarized debates about how to address inequalities and discrimination.
Artikel Lesen
Discrimination in Universal Social Programs? A Nationwide Field Experiment on Access to Child Care
Henning Hermes, Philipp Lergetporer, Fabian Mierisch, Frauke Peter, Simon Wiederhold
IWH Discussion Papers,
Nr. 12,
2023
Abstract
Although explicit discrimination in access to social programs is typically prohibited, more subtle forms of discrimination prior to the formal application process may still exist. Unveiling this phenomenon, we provide the first causal evidence of discrimination against migrants seeking child care. We send emails from fictitious parents to > 18, 000 early child care centers across Germany, inquiring about slot availability and application procedures. Randomly varying names to signal migration background, we find that migrants receive 4.4 percentage points fewer responses. Replies to migrants contain fewer slot offers, provide less helpful content, and are less encouraging. Exploring mechanisms using three additional treatments, we show that discrimination is stronger against migrant boys. This finding suggests that anticipated higher effort required for migrants partly drives discrimination, which is also supported by additional survey and administrative data. Our results highlight that difficult-to-detect discrimination in the pre-application phase could hinder migrants’ access to universal social programs.
Artikel Lesen
Males Should Mail? Gender Discrimination in Access to Childcare
Henning Hermes, Philipp Lergetporer, Fabian Mierisch, Frauke Peter, Simon Wiederhold
American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings,
May
2023
Abstract
This study investigates discrimination against women when searching and applying for childcare in a nationwide field experiment. We send emails from fictitious parents to 9,313 childcare centers in Germany inquiring about access to childcare. We randomize whether the email is sent by the child's mother or father. Our results show that women receive shorter and less positive responses than men. The probability of receiving a response does not differ by gender, highlighting the importance of going beyond response rates to detect discrimination. We provide suggestive evidence that regional differences in gender discrimination are related to gender norms.
Artikel Lesen
People
People Job Market Candidates Doctoral...
Zur Seite
People
People Job Market Candidates Doctoral...
Zur Seite
Wiederhold wp
Does Information about Inequality and Discrimination in Early Child Care Affect Policy Preferences? ...
Zur Seite
Employment Effects of Investment Grants and Firm Heterogeneity – Evidence from a Staggered Adoption Approach
Eva Dettmann, Mirko Titze, Antje Weyh
IWH Discussion Papers,
Nr. 6,
2023
Abstract
This study estimates the establishment-level employment effects of investment grants in Germany. In addition to the average treatment effect for the treated, we focus on discrimination in the funding rules as potential source of effect heterogeneity. We combine the difference-in-differences approach of Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) that explicitly models variation in treatment timing with a ties matching at the cohort level. We observe a positive effect of investment grants on employment development in the full sample. The subsample analysis yields strong evidence for effect heterogeneity due to firm characteristics and the economic environment.
Artikel Lesen
Hysteresis from Employer Subsidies
Emmanuel Saez, Benjamin Schoefer, David Seim
Journal of Public Economics,
August
2021
Abstract
This paper uses administrative data to analyze a large and 8-year long employer payroll tax rate cut in Sweden for young workers aged 26 or less. We replicate previous results documenting that during the earlier years of the reform, it raised youth employment among the treated workers, driven by labor demand (as workers’ take-home wages did not respond). First, drawing on additional years of data, this paper then documents that the longer-run effects during the reform are twice as large as the medium-run effects. Second, we document novel labor-demand-driven “hysteresis” from this policy – i.e. persistent employment effects even after the subsidy no longer applies – along two dimensions. Over the lifecycle, employment effects persist even after workers age out of eligibility. Three years after the repeal, employment remains elevated at the maximal reform level in the formerly subsidized ages. These hysteresis effects more than double the direct employment effects of the reform. Discrimination against young workers in job posting fell during the reform and does not bounce back after repeal, potentially explaining our results.
Artikel Lesen
Do Activist Hedge Funds Target Female CEOs? The Role of CEO Gender in Hedge Fund Activism
Bill Francis, Iftekhar Hasan, Yinjie (Victor) Shen, Qiang Wu
Journal of Financial Economics,
Nr. 1,
2021
Abstract
Using a comprehensive US hedge fund activism dataset from 2003 to 2018, we find that activist hedge funds are about 52% more likely to target firms with female CEOs compared to firms with male CEOs. We find that firm fundamentals, the existence of a “glass cliff,” gender discrimination bias, and hedge fund activists’ inherent characteristics do not explain the observed gender effect. We also find that the transformational leadership style of female CEOs is a plausible explanation for this gender effect: instead of being self-defensive, female CEOs are more likely to communicate and cooperate with hedge fund activists to achieve intervention goals. Finally, we find that female-led targets experience greater increases in market and operational performance subsequent to hedge fund targeting.
Artikel Lesen