[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp1372.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Benefits of Forced Experimentation: Striking Evidence from the London Underground Network

Author

Listed:
  • Shaun Larcom
  • Ferdinand Rauch
  • Tim Willems
Abstract
We estimate that a significant fraction of commuters on the London underground do not travel their optimal route. Consequently, a tube strike (which forced many commuters to experiment with new routes) taught commuters about the existence of superior journeys, bringing about lasting changes in behaviour. This effect is stronger for commuters who live in areas where the tube map is more distorted, thereby pointing towards the importance of informational imperfections. We argue that the information produced by the strike improved network-efficiency. Search costs are unlikely to explain the suboptimal behaviour. Instead, individuals seem to under-experiment in normal times, as a result of which constraints can be welfare-improving.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaun Larcom & Ferdinand Rauch & Tim Willems, 2015. "The Benefits of Forced Experimentation: Striking Evidence from the London Underground Network," CEP Discussion Papers dp1372, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1372
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1372.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberts, Kevin & Weitzman, Martin L, 1981. "Funding Criteria for Research, Development, and Exploration Projects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(5), pages 1261-1288, September.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Patrick Bolton & Christopher Harris & Bruno Jullien, 1991. "Optimal Learning by Experimentation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(4), pages 621-654.
    3. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    4. Berman, Eli & Bui, Linda T. M., 2001. "Environmental regulation and labor demand: evidence from the South Coast Air Basin," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 265-295, February.
    5. Alois Stutzer & Bruno S. Frey, 2008. "Stress that Doesn't Pay: The Commuting Paradox," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(2), pages 339-366, June.
    6. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    7. Eli Berman & Linda T. M. Bui, 2001. "Environmental Regulation And Productivity: Evidence From Oil Refineries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 498-510, August.
    8. Gabriel M. Ahlfeldt & Stephen J. Redding & Daniel M. Sturm & Nikolaus Wolf, 2015. "The Economics of Density: Evidence From the Berlin Wall," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2127-2189, November.
    9. Christopher Anderson, 2012. "Ambiguity aversion in multi-armed bandit problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 15-33, January.
    10. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    11. Rothschild, Michael, 1974. "A two-armed bandit theory of market pricing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 185-202, October.
    12. Aghion, Ph. & Dewatripont, M. & Rey, P., 1997. "Corporate governance, competition policy and industrial policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 797-805, April.
    13. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and the Environment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(1), pages 7-71, March.
    14. Adam B. Jaffe & Karen Palmer, 1997. "Environmental Regulation And Innovation: A Panel Data Study," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 610-619, November.
    15. Yung-Hsiang Cheng, 2010. "Exploring passenger anxiety associated with train travel," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 875-896, November.
    16. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    17. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    19. P.B. Goodwin, 1977. "Habit and Hysteresis in Mode Choice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 14(1), pages 95-98, February.
    20. Gray, Wayne B, 1987. "The Cost of Regulation: OSHA, EPA and the Productivity Slowdown," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 998-1006, December.
    21. Michael Rothschild, 1974. "Searching for the Lowest Price When the Distribution of Prices Is Unknown: A Summary," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 3, number 1, pages 293-294, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Shanjiang Zhu & David M. Levinson, 2012. "Disruptions to Transportation Networks: A Review," Transportation Research, Economics and Policy, in: David M. Levinson & Henry X. Liu & Michael Bell (ed.), Network Reliability in Practice, edition 1, chapter 0, pages 5-20, Springer.
    23. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    24. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    25. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    26. Small, Kenneth A., 2012. "Valuation of travel time," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 2-14.
    27. Rothschild, Michael, 1974. "Searching for the Lowest Price When the Distribution of Prices Is Unknown," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 689-711, July/Aug..
    28. van Exel, N. Job A. & Rietveld, Piet, 2001. "Public transport strikes and traveller behaviour," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 237-246, October.
    29. Michael L. Anderson, 2014. "Subways, Strikes, and Slowdowns: The Impacts of Public Transit on Traffic Congestion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2763-2796, September.
    30. Patrick Bolton & Christopher Harris, 1999. "Strategic Experimentation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 349-374, March.
    31. Morgan, Peter & Manning, Richard, 1985. "Optimal Search," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(4), pages 923-944, July.
    32. Guo, Zhan, 2011. "Mind the map! The impact of transit maps on path choice in public transit," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 625-639, August.
    33. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Yijun & Song, Yi, 2022. "Tax rebates, technological innovation and sustainable development: Evidence from Chinese micro-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    3. Keller, Godfrey & Novák, Vladimír & Willems, Tim, 2019. "A note on optimal experimentation under risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 476-487.
    4. Caroline Orset, 2014. "Innovation and the precautionary principle," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 780-801, November.
    5. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Giovanni Marin & Susanna Mancinelli & Francesco Nicolli, 2015. "Carbon dioxide reducing environmental innovations, sector upstream/downstream integration and policy: evidence from the EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 709-735, November.
    6. Earnhart, Dietrich & Germeshausen, Robert & von Graevenitz, Kathrine, 2022. "Effects of information-based regulation on financial outcomes: Evidence from the European Union's public emission registry," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-015, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Ke, T. Tony & Villas-Boas, J. Miguel, 2019. "Optimal learning before choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 383-437.
    8. Chakraborty, Pavel & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2017. "Does environmental regulation indirectly induce upstream innovation? New evidence from India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 939-955.
    9. He, Yiqing & Ding, Xin & Yang, Chuchu, 2021. "Do environmental regulations and financial constraints stimulate corporate technological innovation? Evidence from China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2001. "Productivité et réglementation environnementale: une analyse de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0107, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    11. Francesco Crespi & Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Quatraro, 2015. "Environmental and innovation policies for the evolution of green technologies: a survey and a test," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 343-370, December.
    12. Pantelis P. Analytis & Amit Kothiyal & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, 2014. "Multi-attribute utility models as cognitive search engines," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 403-419, September.
    13. Xie, Rong-hui & Yuan, Yi-jun & Huang, Jing-jing, 2017. "Different Types of Environmental Regulations and Heterogeneous Influence on “Green” Productivity: Evidence from China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 104-112.
    14. Nusrate Aziz & Belayet Hossain & Laura Lamb, 2022. "Does green policy pay dividends?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 24(2), pages 147-172, April.
    15. Dietrich Earnhart & Dylan G. Rassier, 2016. "“Effective regulatory stringency” and firms’ profitability: the effects of effluent limits and government monitoring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 111-145, October.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:403-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Bengochea-Morancho, Aurelia & Morales-Lage, Rafael, 2019. "Does environmental policy stringency foster innovation and productivity in OECD countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    18. Galeotti, Marzio & Salini, Silvia & Verdolini, Elena, 2020. "Measuring environmental policy stringency: Approaches, validity, and impact on environmental innovation and energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    19. Rassier, Dylan G. & Earnhart, Dietrich, 2015. "Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 129-140.
    20. Marin, Giovanni & Vona, Francesco, 2021. "The impact of energy prices on socioeconomic and environmental performance: Evidence from French manufacturing establishments, 1997–2015," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    21. Caroline Orset, 2017. "Innovation and The Precautionary Principle," Working Papers hal-01500845, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experimentation; learning; optimization; rationality; search;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L91 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Transportation: General
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1372. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.