Der Vergleich der Lebensverhältnisse in Ost- und Westdeutschland orientiert sich häufig am Bruttoinlandsprodukt je Einwohner:in. Dieses Maß ist jedoch für sich genommen kein guter Wohlfahrtsindikator. Es ist davon auszugehen, dass gemessen am Bruttoinlandsprodukt je Einwohner:in in absehbarer Zukunft keine wesentliche weitere Angleichung der Wirtschaftskraft in Ost- und Westdeutschland mehr stattfinden wird. Denn die Altersstruktur Ostdeutschlands, d. h. das Verhältnis von Erwerbstätigenzahl zu Einwohnerzahl, ist ungünstiger als im Westen. Betrachtet man hingegen wichtige Wohlfahrtsindikatoren wie Konsummöglichkeiten, Lebenserwartung, Freizeit und Einkommensungleichheit, so sind die Lebensverhältnisse in Ost- und Westdeutschland ähnlicher als das Bruttoinlandsprodukt je Einwohner:in suggeriert. In den Debatten über den Aufholprozess Ostdeutschlands sollte daher stärker auf die Arbeitsproduktivität als Maß für die Wirtschaftskraft und auf andere Wohlfahrtsindikatoren als Maß für die Angleichung der Lebensverhältnisse abgestellt werden.

By adopting an identification strategy of difference‐in‐difference estimation combined with propensity score matching between liberalized and closed countries, this paper provides robust evidence that opening the capital account is associated with an increase in income inequality in developing countries. Specifically, capital account liberalization, in the long run, is associated with a reduction in the income share of the poorest half by 2.66–3.79% points and an increase in that of the richest 10% by 5.19–8.76% points. Moreover, directions and categories of capital account liberalization matter. The relationship is more pronounced when liberalizing inward and equity capital flows.

Dieser Beitrag untersucht für Unternehmen aus dem Verarbeitenden Gewerbe in Deutschland empirisch, ob der Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe zu einer Steigerung der Produktivität führt. Um die Reaktionen der einheimischen Unternehmen besser zu verstehen, werden auch Effekte auf Output, Beschäftigung und FuE-Aktivitäten der Unternehmen analysiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Anreize der Unternehmen, in eine Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität zu „investieren“, von der Art der importierten Güter abhängen sowie davon, wie schwierig es für die einheimischen Unternehmen ist, mit der Konkurrenz mitzuhalten. Auf Importe von vergleichsweise technologisch einfachen und arbeitsintensiven Produkten aus Niedriglohnländern reagieren einheimische Unternehmen nicht mit einer Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität; vielmehr reduzieren sie Output und Beschäftigung. Dagegen steigt die Produktivität einheimischer Unternehmen als Reaktion auf Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe von kapital- und technologieintensiven Gütern aus Industrieländern – jedoch nicht aufgrund höherer FuE-Ausgaben; ein Rückgang von Output und Beschäftigung ist in diesem Fall nicht beobachtbar.

We implement a novel empirical strategy for measuring and studying a strong form of nationalism—the willingness to fight and die in a war for national independence—using name choices corresponding to a previous war leader. Based on data on almost half a million soldiers, we first show that having been given a first name that is synonymous with the leader(s) of the Croatian state during World War II predicts volunteering for service in the 1991–1995 Croatian war of independence and dying during the conflict. Next, we use the universe of Croatian birth certificates and the information about nationalism conveyed by first names to suggests that in ex-Yugoslav Croatia, nationalism rose continuously starting in the 1970s and that its rise was curbed in areas where concentration camps were located during WWII. Our evidence on intergenerational transmission of nationalism is consistent with nationalist fathers purposefully reflecting the trade-off between within-family and society-wide transmission channels of political values. We also link the nationalist values we proxy using first name choices to right-wing voting behavior in 2015, 20 years after the war.

The term structure of equity and its cyclicality are key to understand the risks drivingequilibrium asset prices. We propose a general equilibrium model that jointly  explainsfour important features of the term structure of equity: (i) a negative unconditionalterm premium, (ii) countercyclical term premia, (iii) procyclical equity yields, and (iv)premia to value and growth claims respectively increasing and decreasing with thehorizon. The economic mechanism hinges on the interaction between heteroskedasticlong-run growth — which helps price long-term cash flows and leads to countercyclicalrisk premia — and homoskedastic short-term shocks in the presence of limited marketparticipation — which produce sizeable risk premia to short-term cash flows. The slopedynamics hold irrespective of the sign of its unconditional average. We provide empirical support to our model assumptions and predictions.

Using survey data from the German Socio‐Economic Panel (SOEP), this paper analyses the extent to which alternative income sources, reactions within the household context, and redistribution by the state attenuate earnings losses after job displacement. Applying propensity score matching and fixed effects estimations, we find that income from self‐employment reduces the earnings gap only slightly and severance payments buffer losses in the short run. On the household level, we find little evidence for an added worker effect whereas redistribution by the state within the tax and transfer system mitigates income losses substantially.

This study examines the relationship between capital account liberalisation and income inequality. Adopting a novel identification strategy, namely a difference-in-difference estimation combined with propensity score matching between the liberalised and closed countries, we provide robust evidence that opening the capital account is associated with an adverse impact on income inequality in developing countries. The main findings are threefold. First, fully liberalising the capital account is associated with a small rise of 0.07-0.30 standard deviations in the Gini coefficient in the short-run and a rise as large as 0.32-0.62 standard deviations in the ten years after liberalisation, on average. Second, widening income inequality is the outcome of the growing income share of the rich at the cost of the poor. The long-term effect of capital account liberalisation includes a reduction in the income share of the poorest half by 2.66-3.79 percentage points and an increase in the income share of the richest 10% by 5.19-8.76 percentage points. Third, the directions and categories of capital account liberalisation matter. Inward capital account liberalisation is more detrimental to income equality than outward capital account liberalisation, and free access to the international equity market exacerbates income inequality the most, while foreign direct investment has an insignificant impact on inequality.

We study the importance of intangible capital (R&D, software, patents) for the measurement of productivity using firm-level panel data from German manufacturing. We first document a number of facts on the evolution of intangible investment over time, and its distribution across firms. Aggregate intangible investment increased over time. However, the distribution of intangible investment, even more so than that of physical investment, is heavily right-skewed, with many firms investing nothing or little, and a few firms having very large intensities. Intangible investment is also lumpy. Firms that invest more intensively in intangibles (per capita or as sales share) also tend to be more productive. In a second step, we estimate production functions with and without intangible capital using recent control function approaches to account for the simultaneity of input choice and unobserved productivity shocks. We find a positive output elasticity for research and development (R&D) and, to a lesser extent, software and patent investment. Moreover, the production function estimates show substantial heterogeneity in the output elasticities across industries and firms. While intangible capital has small effects for firms with low intangible intensity, there are strong positive effects for high-intensity firms. Finally, including intangibles in a gross output production function reduces productivity dispersion (measured by the 90-10 decile range) on average by 3%, in some industries as much as nearly 9%.