My proposal consists of two strands linked by a common theme--namely a concern for the impact of disasters, in financial markets and more generally--and by a shared methodology. In the first of these strands, I propose to develop ways of using observable asset price data to infer the beliefs of market participants about various quantities that are central to financial economics, including (i) the equity premium; (ii) the forward-looking autocorrelation of the market (i.e., time-series momentum); (iii) the risk premia associated with individual stocks; (iv) the correlation between stocks; and (v) measures of asymmetric risk, such as the forward-looking probability of a significant downward jump in the stock market over some prescribed time period. This work will exploit theoretical techniques that I have developed in previous research, and that allow for the possibility of jumps and disasters in financial markets. I will therefore be able to avoid the unpalatable assumption—which is made, implicitly or explicitly, in much of the finance literature—that uncertainty is driven by conditionally Normally distributed shocks (or, in continuous time, by Brownian motions). The importance of doing so is underscored by the turmoil in financial markets over the last few years. These techniques will also be applied in the second strand of my proposal, which focuses on issues related to catastrophes more generally, including for example climate change; highly contagious viruses on the scale of the influenza pandemic of 1918; or nuclear or bio-terrorism. This project will be joint with Professor Robert S. Pindyck of MIT. The goal is to provide a framework within which policymakers, faced with multiple different types of potential catastrophe, can determine how society’s limited resources should best be used to alleviate the associated risks.

Differences in productivity explain much of differences in income levels across countries, yet little is known about how to improve productivity of manufacturing in the developing world. Recent research reveals very high dispersion in productivity in low-income countries. We examine firm productivity at a uniquely detailed level, collecting sub-factory production and survey data from hundreds of garment manufacturers in several countries. The data, coupled with a new method for comparing productivity, allow us to measure physical productivity in and across firms and among heterogeneous products. Initial results from nearly 100 factories in Bangladesh show significant dispersion of productivity within factories; production lines at the 90th percentile are 50% more efficient than those at the 10th percentile. Differences are highly persistent – puzzling given that the lines are often on the same production floor. Capital and the quality of the buyer explains a small part of the dispersion: lines producing goods for higher-end buyers are significantly more efficient. Shocks and interventions allows us to examine the challenges of increasing productivity in volatile conditions characteristic of low-income countries. Our data span a period including general strikes and a 67% minimum wage increase. We have conducted 2 RCTs on line supervisor training. We are designing data collection and analysis tools for use by factories and a program to address issues related to worker stress. We have collected data from 10 factories in Pakistan to benchmark productivity across countries. We are also working with the garment association in Myanmar. Relationships with large European-based buyers have led to discussions on linking with their suppliers in other countries. Our goal over the next 2 years is to collect data from at least 6 to 8 countries in Asia and Africa allowing cross-country analysis of productivity in lower-income countries at an unprecedented level of detail.

Countries globally committed to achieve universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030, as one of the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Progress towards UHC requires concerted efforts to strengthen a country's health system, and health financing reforms are a critical part of that process. Although health financing is an inherently political process, and there is broad consensus and growing literature on the political economy of health financing, there is still limited scholarship on the politics of health financing, and the political economy factors that contribute to the success or failure of health financing reforms, especially in low and middle-income country (LMIC) settings. Like other countries globally - Kenya committed to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030, a commitment that saw the government implement a raft of health financing reforms over the years. However, the majority of scholarship on health financing reforms in Kenya has focused on the technical aspects, specifically on resource mobilisation, risk pooling, purchasing, and designing benefits package, often ignoring the important role that politics plays on the success or failure of such policy reforms. In fact, so far, no study exists on the political economy of health financing reforms in Kenya This research will therefore seek to answer the question: How does politics affect the adoption and implementation of health financing reforms? To answer this question, this research will follow an empirical approach based on qualitative research design. First, the researcher will conduct systematic review of published and grey literature, then will use Fox and Reich's (2015) theory-based framework (of Stages heuristics of the policy process (agenda setting, design, adoption, and implementation) and the 3I's (variables) Ideas and ideologies, interests, and institutions to organize the analysis. Next, the researcher will conduct between 20-30 key informant interviews with stakeholders drawn from government agencies, civil society, advocacy groups, international organisations, public and private health providers among others. The findings of this research will contribute to the growing literature on political economy of health financing in LMICs. This research also hopes to make theoretical contribution, by theorising the political dimension (role of interest groups & other actors etc) in health financing reforms in LMICs. Finally, the research will provide empirical evidence of the effects of political variables on health reforms in Kenya and LMICs, providing lessons to policymakers and planners on the theoretical and empirical findings on the politics of health reform in LMICs

Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.