Saturday, November 4, 2017

Market design in the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, edited by Kominers, Teytelboym and Crawford


Market Design

ARTICLES

Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 541–571, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx063
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 572–588, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx040
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 589–612, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx041
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 613–634, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx046
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 635–649, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx043
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 650–675, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx042
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 676–704, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx048
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 33, Issue 4, 2 November 2017, Pages 705–720, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx047

Friday, November 3, 2017

Payday lending and check cashing


In the WSJ:
The Hand-to-Hand Combat to Save Payday Lending
Payday lenders and consumer advocates fuel letter-writing campaigns ahead of the introduction of regulatory oversight

"Florida payday lender Amscot Financial Inc. in the summer of 2016 rounded up about 600,000 letters from customers protesting a regulator’s plan to clamp down on high-interest loans. The letters, many handwritten, were scanned, packed in 131 cartons and shipped to Washington.

The unusual campaign by Amscot was part of a fight between the payday industry and consumer advocates to try to sway the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is expected in the coming days to introduce federal oversight of the $38.5 billion industry.

Payday loans are used by an estimated 10 million to 12 million Americans every year, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck. The loans are typically a few hundred dollars and due in two weeks, or on the borrower’s next payday. Their annualized interest rates, which can rise to nearly 400%, have long troubled regulators.

The CFPB rule would supplement a mishmash of state rules. It would likely require lenders to assess borrowers’ ability to repay and make it harder to roll over loans, a lucrative part of the business. The practice, where customers take out new loans to repay old ones, often leads to snowballing fees. Lenders say such requirements would wipe out the market for short-term payday loans."
...
"The CFPB’s payday rule is among a handful of recent regulations that generated millions of comments. In recent years, the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule to curb carbon emissions from power plants drew 4.3 million comments. The “net neutrality” plan governing internet-service providers attracted more than 22 million comments."

Thursday, November 2, 2017

Turkey to toughen laws on surrogacy, which contains "elements of adultery."

Turkey to toughen laws on surrogacy
The URL is more graphic than the headline: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/09/turkey-to-introduce-jail-for-surrogate-mothers.html

"Under the present law, surrogate motherhood is in a gray area. The 282/1 article of the Turkish Civil Code says that the relationship between mother and child is established through birth. This means that surrogate motherhood “has no basis in Turkish law” and that the surrogate mother is the mother. Should a couple try to have a child by a surrogate mother, establishing parenthood becomes a legal muddle. In vitro fertilization, on the other hand, is possible, and there are regulations in the Turkish bylaws about Assisted Reproduction and Infertility Centers, which can be used by married couples only.
If they want to have a child through a surrogate mother, most Turks simply choose to go abroad and come back with a baby, which they have registered under the name of the genetic parents. There are numerous stories about couples who go to Northern Cyprus, Ukraine or Georgia, where surrogacy is legal. Allegedly, the price for the process varies from $40,000 to $70,000. A simple Google search results in a list of websites of companies that advertise surrogate motherhood as part of their services. Turkish media has in the past published some personal stories of women who decided to become surrogate mothers in Northern Cyprus, describing the process and explaining the uneasy choices and decisions.
But the new law, reported by Hurriyet journalist Meltem Ozgenc, aims to fill in the gray area and ban surrogate motherhood altogether, including abroad, by Turkish citizens. It also bans “mediation,” “assistance,” “encouragement” or “advertisement” for surrogacy.
According to information that Al-Monitor has obtained, several provisions will be added to the current Law No. 2238 on the “Harvesting, Storage, Grafting, and Transplantation of Organs and Tissues.” The revision of the law is expected to pass within the scope of one of the upcoming decrees by the power of law — the main ruling mechanism since the government declared a state of emergency in July 2016 after the attempted coup.
The new draft law says: “Having a child or serving as a surrogate mother is banned if the pregnancy is undertaken through the reproductive cells taken from one or both of the partners, or if the embryo acquired from these cells are inseminated into others.”
According to the Hurriyet Daily News, the new draft law prohibits “undertaking a donation procedure to use someone else’s reproductive cells or embryo, as well as to donate, sell, use, stock, transfer, import and export reproductive cells or embryos for this purpose.”
The draft’s last paragraph adds that the penalties foreseen in the law are applicable even if the surrogacy takes place in a country where it is legal.
Besides introducing prison time between two to five years for those involved in surrogate motherhood, the law also clarifies legal eligibility for in vitro fertilization. More precisely, the additions to the existing legislation would confirm that the in vitro fertilization process could be applied if the couple cannot have a child in natural ways and if there is a medical necessity. Yet the procedure would be allowed just for married couples, and it can only be performed in licensed centers and by medical professionals granted authority by the Ministry of Health.
The emphasis on married couples is undoubtedly in line with mainstream Sunni religious interpretations of Islam in Turkey, as the statements by the country’s top religious affairs body have confirmed in the past. In 2015, the High Council’s platform of the Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) said that in vitro fertilization between unmarried individuals “offended humane feelings and contained elements of adultery.” At the same time, it was stated that surrogate motherhood is also deemed religiously unacceptable, as it is viewed to contain elements of adultery. This view has been confirmed by some prominent religious figures, including Hayrettin Karaman and renowned televangelists such as Nihat Hatipoglu.
The adultery argument is a common basis for banning surrogacy within Sunni Islam, as the sperm of a man is introduced into the uterus of a woman other than his wife, which is prohibited by verses in the Quran. Other reasons for banning surrogacy, according to Ruaim Muaygil, are “preservation of lineage, exclusion of third parties in reproduction, upholding the rights of the child and protection from the negative effects of surrogacy.” On the other hand, more progressive professionals and scholars such as Muaygil clarify between traditional and gestational surrogacy, and use Islamic law and bioethics alongside medical evidence to show that “surrogacy is not only consistent with Sunni Islamic teachings, but is also both ethically justified and medically necessary.”

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Callisto: Designing a reporting system for sexual assault


Callisto is an interesting website designed to reduce the under-reporting of sexual assault, and make it easier to identify serial predators. The "Match" option is particularly interesting in this regard.

"Callisto offers students three options:

Record. Survivors can create secure, encrypted, and time-stamped records about their sexual assault. On average, survivors who report begin the process 11 months after experiencing sexual assault. Callisto allows students to immediately preserve evidence on their own terms, at a time, place, and pace that is best for them.

Report. Survivors can electronically send the record they have created to their school. This equips schools with a detailed account of what happened before the student ever meets with them. Reports submitted through Callisto led to more rapid and thorough investigations and reduced the chances for human error.

Match. Survivors can help schools identify repeat offenders using Callisto’s matching function. This option allows survivors to store information about their perpetrator under the precondition that it will only be released to the school if another student names the same perpetrator."
***********

I can't find much about the use of the service or its impact on outcomes from their very brief annual report, however.

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Market Design in the Economic Journal: Designing science

Two sections of the October 2017 Feature Issue of the Economic Journal deal with market design.  The second of these, on Designing Auctions, is apparent.  The first, on The Confidence Crisis in Science is less obvious, until you think of the problem of how to conduct open science (peer review, replication, etc.) as a problem in market design.  The first paper linked below lays out this point of view very clearly.
  1. FEATURE: THE CONFIDENCE CRISIS IN SCIENCE

    1. You have free access to this content
      The Research Reproducibility Crisis and Economics of Science (pages F200–F208)
      Zacharias Maniadis and Fabio Tufano
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12526
    2. You have free access to this content
    3. You have free access to this content
      The Power of Bias in Economics Research (pages F236–F265)
      John P. A. Ioannidis, T. D. Stanley and Hristos Doucouliagos
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12461
    4. You have free access to this content
      Persuasion Bias in Science: Can Economics Help? (pages F266–F304)
      Alfredo Di Tillio, Marco Ottaviani and Peter Norman Sørensen
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12515

  2. FEATURE: DESIGNING AUCTIONS

    1. You have full text access to this content
      The German 4G Spectrum Auction: Design and Behaviour (pages F305–F324)
      Peter Cramton and Axel Ockenfels
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12406
    2. You have full text access to this content
      Determining the Optimal Length of Regulatory Guarantee: A Length-of-contract Auction (pages F325–F333)
      Thomas Greve and Michael G. Pollitt
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12405
    3. You have full text access to this content
      A Practical Guide to the Combinatorial Clock Auction (pages F334–F350)
      Lawrence M. Ausubel and Oleg Baranov
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12404
    4. You have full text access to this content
      Auction Format and Auction Sequence in Multi-item Multi-unit Auctions: An Experimental Study (pages F351–F371)
      Regina Betz, Ben Greiner, Sascha Schweitzer and Stefan Seifert
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12403
    5. You have full text access to this content
      Pro-competitive Rationing in Multi-unit Auctions (pages F372–F395)
      Pär Holmberg
      Version of Record online: 24 OCT 2017 | DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12402

Monday, October 30, 2017

Global Kidney Exchange endorsed by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons

Here's a sentence I was very glad to read yesterday:
"we commend Dr. Rees and colleagues for their creativity, integrity, beneficence, and tireless efforts to pioneer Global Kidney Exchange to demonstrate its feasibility. "

That is from a newly adopted position statement of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Some background:
In recent posts I've described how the discussion of Global Kidney Exchange (GKE) has developed since our article in the American Journal of Transplantation,  including some opposition expressed in an accompanying editorial and subsequent letters.  Now cooler heads have prevailed, and the Executive Committee of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (which publishes the AJT) has issued the following official position statement:

ASTS Position on Global Kidney Exchanges

Drafted and finalized by the ASTS Executive Committee, October 2017

ASTS supports efforts to increase access to transplantation by increasing the organ supply and by removing biologic, logistical, geographical, and financial barriers. ASTS supports efforts by the global transplant community to increase access to transplant care through kidney exchanges across national boundaries. ASTS also supports constructive engagement with transplant stakeholders in the developing world. In that regard, the Society supports the conceptual basis behind Global Kidney Exchanges. Further, we commend Dr. Rees and colleagues for their creativity, integrity, beneficence, and tireless efforts to pioneer Global Kidney Exchange to demonstrate its feasibility.  The Society acknowledges that there is potential for abuse, particularly in regard to patient selection, coercion, and equitable participation. ASTS encourages further investigation into the ethics, logistics, governance, and financial aspects of Global Kidney Exchange.
************
This position apparently resulted from some considered deliberation: the email I received announcing this statement said that "ASTS discussed this topic at its recent council meeting (October  12th) and subsequent executive committee call (October 26th)."

Given the well organized initial attempt to characterize GKE as repugnant, I was particularly glad to see that the statement applauds Mike Rees, not just for this work but for the way it has been conducted with
"creativity, integrity, beneficence, and tireless efforts to pioneer Global Kidney Exchange to demonstrate its feasibility. " 

As the statement makes clear, however, much work remains.  

Sunday, October 29, 2017

Family consent for deceased organ donation in Britain

From the BBC: Hundreds of families block organ donation

"Organs from 505 registered donors could not be made available for transplant in the last five years because of objections from relatives.
...
"The law states that consent lies with the deceased, but in practice, relatives' wishes are always respected.
The NHS wants to reduce the number of "overrides" by encouraging prospective donors to talk to their relatives.
In England, NHS figures showed that 457 people died last year whilst waiting for an organ transplant."

Saturday, October 28, 2017

Two-sided matching with indifferences by Aytek Erdil and Haluk Ergin

Aytek Erdil and Haluk Ergin have a new paper in JET:

Two-sided matching with indifferences
Journal of Economic Theory, 171, 268-292, September 2017

Abstract
"Most of the two-sided matching literature maintains the assumption that agents are never indifferent between any two members of the opposite side. In practice, however, ties in preferences arise naturally and are widespread. Market design needs to handle ties carefully, because in the presence of indifferences, stability no longer implies Pareto efficiency, and the deferred acceptance algorithm cannot be applied to produce a Pareto efficient or a worker-optimal stable matching.

"We allow ties in preference rankings and show that the Pareto dominance relation on stable matchings can be captured by two simple operations which involve rematching of workers and firms via cycles or chains. Likewise, the Pareto relation defined via workers' welfare can also be broken down to two similar procedures which preserve stability. Using these structural results we design fast algorithms to compute a Pareto efficient and stable matching, and a worker-optimal stable matching."
**************

It is a followup to their earlier important paper

Erdil, Aytek; Ergin, Haluk, "What's the matter with tie-breaking? Improving efficiency in school choice," American Economic Review, 98, 3, 669-689, JUN 2008

Abstract
In several school choice districts in the United States, the student proposing deferred acceptance algorithm is applied after indifferences in priority orders are broken in some exogenous way. Although such a tie-breaking procedure preserves stability, it adversely affects the welfare of the students since it introduces artificial stability constraints. Our main finding is a polynomial-time algorithm for the computation of a student-optimal stable matching when priorities are weak. The idea behind our construction relies on a new notion which we call a stable improvement cycle. We also investigate the strategic properties of the student-optimal stable mechanism.

Friday, October 27, 2017

Bone marrow and blood stem cell update

Here's an article that recounts the recent events regarding payment to donors of blood stem cells.

Hope for to-marrow: the status of paid peripheral blood stem cell donation under the National Organ Transplant Act 
Kelly Todd
Journal of Law and the Biosciences, Volume 4, Issue 2, 1 August 2017, Pages 412–423

Abstract




The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA), enacted in 1984, bans the exchange of bone marrow and a number of other human organs for valuable consideration. At the time NOTA was enacted, bone marrow could only be harvested by aspirating bone marrow tissue from a donor's bone cavities. However, recent medical and technological advances now allow doctors to use a much less invasive apheresis method, which collects the transplantable stem cells from a donor's peripheral blood stream. In 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that such donations do not fall into the category of “bone marrow” under NOTA, and can therefore be compensated. Not long after the court's final ruling, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed a rule to explicitly bring hematopoietic stem cells back under the purview of NOTA. The transplant community, seeing compensated donation as a solution to the shortage of altruistic bone marrow donors, fiercely opposed the rule. After years of limbo, HHS officially withdrew the proposed rule in August, 2017, which will allow groups to financially incentivize potential peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) donors. This commentary addresses the moral and ethical issues implicated by paid PBSC donation, the role that regulation could play, and the potential impacts of paid PBSC donation on the transplant community, Ultimately, this article concludes that providing financial incentives to PBSC donors will likely have an overall positive impact on the transplant community by encouraging more donors to join the registry, and motivating donors to follow through with their donations once matched.

Thursday, October 26, 2017

Fake peer reviews appear to be a problem in some fields

Scientific publishing is full of challenges, but fake peer reviews are an issue which as far as I am aware is not a significant problem in Economics, although it appears to be in some other fields.

E.g. here's a post from Retraction Watch:
Major publisher retracting more than 100 studies from cancer journal over fake peer reviews
"Springer is retracting 107 papers from one journal after discovering they had been accepted with fake peer reviews. Yes, 107.

"To submit a fake review, someone (often the author of a paper) either makes up an outside expert to review the paper, or suggests a real researcher — and in both cases, provides a fake email address that comes back to someone who will invariably give the paper a glowing review. In this case, Springer, the publisher of Tumor Biology through 2016, told us that an investigation produced “clear evidence” the reviews were submitted under the names of real researchers with faked emails. Some of the authors may have used a third-party editing service, which may have supplied the reviews. "

And this:
Can you spot a fake? New tool aims to help journals identify fake reviews
*************

Here's a related NY Times article:
Fraud Scandals Sap China’s Dream of Becoming a Science Superpower

"Having conquered world markets and challenged American political and military leadership, China has set its sights on becoming a global powerhouse in a different field: scientific research. It now has more laboratory scientists than any other country, outspends the entire European Union on research and development, and produces more scientific articles than any other nation except the United States.

"But in its rush to dominance, China has stood out in another, less boastful way. Since 2012, the country has retracted more scientific papers because of faked peer reviews than all other countries and territories put together, according to Retraction Watch, a blog that tracks and seeks to publicize retractions of research papers.
...
"In April, a scientific journal retracted 107 biology research papers, the vast majority of them written by Chinese authors, after evidence emerged that they had faked glowing reviews of their articles. Then, this summer, a Chinese gene scientist who had won celebrity status for breakthroughs once trumpeted as Nobel Prize-worthy was forced to retract his research when other scientists failed to replicate his results.

"At the same time, a government investigation highlighted the existence of a thriving online black market that sells everything from positive peer reviews to entire research articles."