Affiliation:
1. Stanford Law School and NBER
2. London School of Economics
Abstract
Abstract
Default effects are pervasive, but the reason they arise is often unclear. We study optimal policy when the planner does not know whether an observed default effect reflects a welfare-relevant preference or a mistake. Within a broad class of models, we find that determining optimal policy is impossible without resolving this ambiguity. Depending on the resolution, optimal policy tends in opposite directions: either minimizing the number of nondefault choices or inducing active choice. We show how these considerations depend on whether active choosers make mistakes when selecting among nondefault options. We illustrate our results using data on pension contribution defaults.
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Reference41 articles.
1. What Do Consumers Consider before They Choose? Identification from Asymmetric Demand Responses,;Abaluck;Quarterly Journal of Economics,2019
2. Regressive Sin Taxes, with an Application to the Optimal Soda Tax,;Allcott;Quarterly Journal of Economics,2019
3. Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment;Altmann,2019
4. Filling Gaps in Incomplete Contracts: An Economic Theory of Default Rules,;Ayres;Yale Law Journal,1989
5. The Welfare Economics of Default Options in 401(k) Plans,;Bernheim;American Economic Review,2015
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献