“Evaluating the effects of a low-cost, online financial education program“ (with Robert L. Clark, Annamaria Lusardi, Olivia S. Mitchell, and Andrea Sticha), Journal of Economics Behavior & Organization, Volume 232, April 2025

[Link to full text]
Abstract: We provide evidence on how a low-cost, online, and scalable financial education program influences older participants’ financial knowledge. We test the program using a field experiment that includes short stories covering three fundamental financial education topics: compound interest, risk diversification, and inflation. Two surveys are administered eight months apart to measure the effects of those stories on middle-aged and older (45+) participants’ short-term and longer-term knowledge and financial behavior. We show that the risk diversification story is the most effective at improving participants’ knowledge, in both the short and longer terms. In the short term, reading the risk diversification story significantly increased the likelihood of correctly answering the related knowledge questions by 17–18 percentage points. The compound interest and inflation stories significantly increase participant knowledge in the short term, but the gain in financial literacy declines over time. Furthermore, timestamp data was used to show that the inflation story increased the time participants spent answering the related knowledge questions suggesting that exposure to our story boosted participants’ attentiveness and interest in the topic. Over just an eight-month time period, the stories do not seem to have a significant effect on financial behaviors as measured by four financial distress indicators and a financial resilience index. Nevertheless, higher financial literacy is positively linked to better financial decision-making. The eight months might be too short to measure significant behavioral change; thus, further research is needed to prove the intervention’s effect on financial behavior in the long run.

“Do Households Value Lower Density:Theory, Evidence, and Implications from Washington DC“, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Volume 108, September 2024

[Link to full text]
Abstract: A substantial literature demonstrates that zoning restrictions on building height or density lower supply and increase housing prices. However, negative externalities due to household preferences for lower neighborhood density could justify restrictions on private developers. Thus building density in a laissez-faire city may be above the welfare maximizing level. The potential external costs of height and density are tested here and found to be substantial. Increased building separation appears to mitigate the external cost of height. This implies that some level of density or floor regulation (FAR) may be welfare-enhancing, and that the gap between price and marginal construction cost may overstate the social cost of zoning because households value lower density. The analysis considers residential density and not employment density which can give rise to other types of externalities.

“Geographic connectivity and cross-border investment: The Belts, Roads and Skies” (with Maggie Xiaoyang Chen), Journal of Development Economics 146, September 2020

[Link to full text]
Abstract: How much have falling transport costs through the diffusion of transport networks contributed to the growth of cross-border investment? Exploring rich cross-country transport network and travel time data and exogenous sources of variations from cost and supply requirements of transportation technology, we show that expanding transport networks have reshaped the spatial organization and distance elasticities of cross-border investments. The proliferation of direct flights, liner shipping, and high-speed rail have flattened the spatial distribution of global investments and contributed to a 27-percent increase in the world’s cross-border investment in 2000–2012. The analysis also predicts that the Belt and Road Initiative, the most ambitious transport initiative in recent history, could further raise cross-border investment by 3 percent for participating countries and 1 percent for non-participating countries via network spillovers. The effects vary, however, with market size, regulatory efficiency, and trade integration and are especially vital for developing nations with less attractive market and institutional characteristics.