Inequality aversion predicts support for public and private redistribution.

Rising inequality has brought redistribution back on the political agenda. In theory, inequality aversion drives people's support for redistribution. People can dislike both advantageous inequality (comparison relative to those worse off) and disadvantageous inequality (comparison relative to those better off). Existing experimental evidence reveals substantial variation across people in these preferences. However, evidence is scarce on the broader role of these two distinct forms of inequality aversion for redistribution in society. We provide evidence by exploiting a unique combination of data. We use an incentivized experiment to measure inequality aversion in a large population sample (≈9,000 among 20- to 64-y-old Danes). We link the elicited inequality aversion to survey information on individuals' support for public redistribution (policies that reduce income differences) and administrative records revealing their private redistribution (real-life donations to charity). In addition, the link to administrative data enables us to include a large battery of controls in the empirical analysis. Theory predicts that support for public redistribution increases with both types of inequality aversion, while private redistribution should increase with advantageous inequality aversion, but decrease with disadvantageous inequality aversion. A strong dislike for disadvantageous inequality makes people willing to sacrifice own income to reduce the income of people who are better off, thereby reducing the distance to people with more income than themselves. Public redistribution schemes achieve this but private donations to charity do not. Our empirical results provide strong support for these predictions and with quantitatively large effects compared to other predictors.

Preferences predict who commits crime among young men.

Understanding who commits crime and why is a key topic in social science and important for the design of crime prevention policy. In theory, people who commit crime face different social and economic incentives for criminal activity than other people, or they evaluate the costs and benefits of crime differently because they have different preferences. Empirical evidence on the role of preferences is scarce. Theoretically, risk-tolerant, impatient, and self-interested people are more prone to commit crime than risk-averse, patient, and altruistic people. We test these predictions with a unique combination of data where we use incentivized experiments to elicit the preferences of young men and link these experimental data to their criminal records. In addition, our data allow us to control extensively for other characteristics such as cognitive skills, socioeconomic background, and self-control problems. We find that preferences are strongly associated with actual criminal behavior. Impatience and, in particular, risk tolerance are still strong predictors when we include the full battery of controls. Crime propensities are 8 to 10 percentage points higher for the most risk-tolerant individuals compared to the most risk averse. This effect is half the size of the effect of cognitive skills, which is known to be a very strong predictor of criminal behavior. Looking into different types of crime, we find that preferences significantly predict property offenses, while self-control problems significantly predict violent, drug, and sexual offenses.

Role of income mobility for the measurement of inequality in life expectancy.

This work proposes a method to compute the income gradient in period life expectancy that accounts for income mobility. Using income and mortality records of the Danish population over the period 1980-2013, we validate the method and provide estimates of the income gradient. The period life expectancy of individuals at a certain age, and belonging to a certain income class, is normally computed by using the mortality of older cohorts in the same income class. This approach does not take into account that a substantial fraction of the population moves away from their original income class, which leads to an upward bias in the estimation of the income gradient in life expectancy. For 40-y-olds in the bottom 5% of the income distribution, the risk of dying before age 60 is overestimated by 25%. For the top 5% income class, the risk of dying is underestimated by 20%. By incorporating a classic approach from the social mobility literature, we provide a method that predicts income mobility and future mortality simultaneously. With this method, the association between income and life expectancy is lower throughout the income distribution. Without accounting for income mobility, the estimated difference in life expectancy between persons in percentiles 20 and 80 in the income distribution is 4.6 y for males and 4.1 y for females, while it is only half as big when accounting for mobility. The estimated rise in life-expectancy inequality over time is also halved when accounting for income mobility.

Neonatal health of parents and cognitive development of children.

It is well-established that neonatal health is a strong predictor of socioeconomic outcomes later in life, but does neonatal health also predict key outcomes of the next generation? This paper documents a surprisingly strong relationship between birth weight of parents and school test scores of their children. The association between maternal birth weight and child test scores corresponds to 50-80 percent of the association between the child's own birth weight and test scores across various empirical specifications, for example including grandmother fixed effects that isolate within-family differences between mothers. Paternal and maternal birth weights are equally important in predicting child test scores. Our intergenerational results suggest that inequality in neonatal health is important for inequality in key outcomes of the next generation.