I have been the Managing Editor of the Journal of Economic Perspectives since the first issue in Summer 1987. The JEP is published by the American Economic Association, which decided back in 2011–to my delight–that the journal would be freely available online, from the current issue all the way back to the first issue. You can download individual articles or entire issues, and it is available in various e-reader formats, too. Here, I’ll start with the Table of Contents for the just-released Spring 2025 issue, which in the Taylor household is known as issue #152. Below that are abstracts and direct links for all of the papers. I plan to blog more specifically about some of the papers in the few weeks, as well.
________
Symposium: Drug Pricing and Regulation
“Economic Markets and Pharmaceutical Innovation,” by Craig Garthwaite
Pharmaceutical innovations reach the market after a long and risky process that requires large, fixed, and sunk investments. Governments provide incentives for firms to make these investments through various forms of intellectual property protection that attempt to provide a return on capital for investors. As a result, pharmaceutical innovation results from an explicit intersection of public policy and private market incentives. Developing optimal policy therefore requires understanding market features such as how innovation is financed, how firms commercialize pharmaceutical products, the influence of insurance coverage on consumption and spending, and how competition emerges after intellectual property protection ends.
“Patents, Innovation, and Competition in Pharmaceuticals: The Hatch-Waxman Act after 40 Years,” by C. Scott Hemphill and Bhaven N. Sampat
A central policy issue in pharmaceuticals is how to balance the dynamic benefits of new drugs against the static benefits of low prices for existing drugs. In the United States, that balance is set by the Hatch-Waxman Act. We review the Act’s origins and key features, then present evidence on its effects on competition and innovation. On the competition side, we show how the Act creates incentives for brands to accumulate patents and generics to challenge them, with the result being a rough stalemate. We also discuss strategies deployed by brands to delay generic entry. On the innovation side, we show that the Act’s patent extension provisions—which aim to allow branded firms to make up for time lost during clinical trials and regulatory review—are incomplete, resulting in potential distortions. The net result is a convoluted and expensive approach to balancing innovation and competition.
“Lessons for the United States from Pharmaceutical Regulation Abroad,” by Margaret K. Kyle
Pharmaceutical markets are characterized by barriers to entry and information problems. Many countries intervene in the pricing and reimbursement of drugs to a greater extent than the US government to date. Continued pressure from politicians and recent legislation are likely to change the market for pharmaceuticals in the United States. This article discusses the approaches adopted in other developed countries and the implications of their use in the United States, which due to its size, has far greater influence over the rate and direction of innovation. Alternative policy choices and the challenges of their implementation are also reviewed.
“The Economics of Generic Drug Shortages: The Limits of Competition,” Rena M. Conti and Marta E. Wosińska
We examine the economics of the US generic prescription drug market, which comprises the majority of medicines sold. The market is celebrated for its benefits in the form of high quality and low prices for consumers but is also increasingly challenged by shortages that may disrupt patient care. Shortages in the generic drug market present an economic puzzle—in the face of a shortage, prices should rise, encouraging entry, yet we observe shortages increasing in number and persistence. Moreover, if shortages cause patient harm, why don’t markets pay a premium for a reliable supply chain? We argue that the puzzle can be explained by the inability of generic drug prices to adjust easily due to regulatory and contracting frictions, and the coexisting presence of asymmetric information and agency problems in the US market. We conclude with a discussion of policy interventions aimed at addressing these challenges to ensure resilient US generic drug supply.
Symposium: Income Inequality
“Measuring Income and Income Inequality,” by Conor Clarke and Wojciech Kopczuk
Income inequality is important, but attempts to measure it arrive at strikingly different conclusions. Why? We use recent disputes over measuring United States income inequality to return to first principles about both the income concept and inequality measurement. We emphasize two broad points. First, no measure of the income distribution is truly comprehensive, or could attempt to be comprehensive without making controversial choices. We document the practical and conceptual problems that the standard ideal—comprehensive Haig-Simons income—raises. Second, much of the controversy in this area turns on the many tradeoffs between starting with individual tax data versus more expansive income concepts. Individual tax data reflect only a shrinking subset of a more comprehensive income concept–but they are individual data. More expansive alternatives, on the other hand, are harder to allocate to individuals. We document some of the most important and contestable assumptions that such an allocation requires.
“Macro Perspectives on Income Inequality,” by Matthieu Gomez
Inequality has become a defining challenge for modern economies and a central focus of economic research over the past two decades. I begin by revisiting the foundations of income measurement, showing that standard definitions—taxable income, factor income, and Haig-Simons income—suffer from important conceptual limitations. I contrast these income measures with the ideal notion of income from a welfare perspective—Hicksian income—which captures an individual’s ability to consume or save for future consumption. I then examine the drivers of rising top income inequality, with particular attention to the surge in entrepreneurial incomes. I highlight three key forces behind this phenomenon: higher returns on capital (technological factors), lower external financing costs (financial factors), and a lighter tax burden on business owners (fiscal factors).
“Public Finance Implications of Economic Inequality,” by Alan J. Auerbach
This paper considers questions about the implications of rising inequality for the theory and practice of public finance. It begins by addressing fundamental reasons why the distribution of income or wealth on an annual basis before taxes and transfers offers insufficient information: (1) it does not tell us what resources are actually available to households for consumption; and (2) in providing a snapshot of the resources available to individuals of different ages at a given moment in time, without controlling for life-cycle related differences or income dynamics, it can provide a misleading estimate of the underlying degree of inequality. The paper then considers the implications of high and perhaps rising economic inequality for the design of government policy: top marginal tax rates, phase-outs of government policies for those with higher incomes, the political economy of inequality, and other subjects.
Symposium: Bond Markets
“A Hitchhiker’s Guide to Federal Reserve Participation in Fixed Income Markets,” by Nina Boyarchenko and Or Shachar
We review US dealer-intermediated fixed income markets, including Treasuries, agency mortgage-backed securities, corporate bonds, and municipal bonds. Through the lenses of primary dealers’ positions, we show these markets’ evolution over the past decade and the effects of recent episodes of abrupt deterioration in market functioning. We then overview how the Federal Reserve interacts with fixed income markets for the purposes of monetary policy implementation and liquidity interventions. We conclude by discussing the shifting composition of investors in US fixed income markets, and what consequences such changes in the investor base may have for monetary policy transmissions.
“How US Treasuries Can Remain the World’s Safe Haven,” by Darrell Duffie
Weaknesses in the design of the market for US Treasuries have reduced the effectiveness of world’s favored safe-haven asset. Since the Global Financial Crisis, the market’s intermediation capacity is far more constrained by the balance sheets of dealer banks, which handle virtually all investor trades. Since 2007, the total size of primary dealer balance sheets per dollar of Treasuries outstanding has shrunk by a factor of four. This trend continues because of large US fiscal deficits and post-GFC regulatory capital constraints, which are necessary for financial stability but limit the provision of liquidity under stress. For US Treasuries to remain a powerful safe haven, the intermediation capacity of the market will need to be expanded and further supported by official-sector backstops.
“US Corporate Bond Markets: Bigger and (Maybe) Better?” by Maureen O’Hara and Xing (Alex) Zhou
The US corporate bond market has expanded significantly, fueled by electronic trading, institutional innovation, and growing retail participation via mutual and exchange-traded funds. These developments have improved efficiency by reducing costs and enhancing transparency, yet they have also introduced new vulnerabilities. The market’s shift from relationship-based to transaction-based trading has weakened its ability to absorb stress, especially during periods of widespread selling. We examine the structural changes that have reduced dealer intermediation, the limited liquidity benefits of electronic platforms, and the destabilizing role of fund flows. The COVID-19 crisis exposed these weaknesses, prompting the Federal Reserve to act as a “market maker of last resort.” We argue that while the market is “better” in many ways, enhancing resilience through transparency and long-term investor participation is essential for future stability.
“Why Is the Fragmented Municipal Bond Market So Costly to Investors and Issuers” by John M. Griffin, Nicholas Hirschey, and Samuel Kruger
The municipal bond market plays a crucial role in providing capital to US municipalities and functions through a network of underwriters, municipal advisors, credit rating agencies, insurers, individual and institutional investors, and multiple regulators. Many of these market participants have significant asymmetric information and conflicting incentive structures, which can sometimes lead to disparate and seemingly inefficient outcomes. Puzzles documented in the academic literature include high underwriting costs, conflicting roles by municipal advisors, extreme and widely varying trade markups, investment holdings that are often not tax-efficient, inconsistent implied marginal tax rates, a heavy reliance on credit ratings, little benefit but widespread use of insurance, delayed use of call provisions, and inconsistent treatment of accounting information. We review issues in the municipal bond market and propose implementable suggestions that would hopefully allow for a more competitive and low-cost market for both taxpayers and investors.
Features
“Retrospectives: Yair Mundlak and the Fixed Effects Estimator,” by Marc F. Bellemare and Daniel L. Millimet
We discuss Yair Mundlak’s (1927–2015) contribution to econometrics through the lens of the fixed effects estimator. We set the stage by discussing Mundlak’s life and his seminal 1961 article in the Journal of Farm Economics, showing how it was looking at the right application—the study of agricultural productivity, which had hitherto been thought to be marred by the presence of management bias—that led Mundlak to use the fixed effects estimator. After discussing Mundlak’s contribution, we briefly discuss the historical economic and statistical contexts in which he made that contribution. We then highlight the dialogue that took place between the proponents of fixed versus random effects and discuss how Mundlak settled the debate in his 1978 Econometrica article. We conclude by discussing how, between fixed and random effects, the fixed effects estimator won the day, becoming the de facto estimator of choice among applied economists because of the Credibility Revolution, culminating in the popularity nowadays of difference-in-differences designs and of two-way fixed effects estimators.
“Recommendations for Further Reading,” by Timothy Taylor
