Search

Class size reduction mandates are frequent and invariably justified by studies reporting positive effects on student achievement. Yet other studies report no effects, and the literature as a whole awaits correction for potential publication bias. Moreover, if identification drives results systematically, the relevance of individual studies will vary. We build a sample of 1,767 estimates collected from 62 studies and for each estimate codify 42 factors reflecting estimation context. We employ recently developed nonlinear techniques for publication bias correction and Bayesian model averaging techniques that address model uncertainty. The results suggest publication bias among studies featured in top five economics journals, but not elsewhere. The implied class size effect is zero for all identification approaches except Tennessees Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio project. The effect remains zero for disadvantaged students and across subjects, school types, and countries.

Dietary choices are one of the main causes of mortality and environmental degradation. Plant-based diets, in comparison to diets rich in animal products, are considered to be more sustainable because they use fewer natural resources and come with a lower environmental burden, resulting in lower greenhouse gas emissions in particular. However, the rapid increase in global population and wealth has led to an increased demand for foods of animal origin. Getting enough protein might be one of the reasons people consume animal products but its increased consumption could negatively impact our health and environment. Hence, the aim of this paper is to examine the economic and sociodemographic factors that influence the amount and the share of animal food intake as well as the amount and the share of animal-based protein in the worldwide diet. An econometric analysis of country-level panel data allows us to investigate the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in the context of a sustainable diet. The findings suggest that the relationship between GDP per capita and animal-based food and protein supply resembles an inverted U-shaped curve. In the global analysis, the turning point is estimated to be around $ 81,500 in relation to both the share of animal food supply and the share of animal proteins. The resulting income elasticity shows to be inelastic across the domain, however, the specific values vary depending on the country's level of GDP. The elasticity is positive for low- to middle-income countries with its maximum of 0.29; and it becomes negative once a country reaches a GDP level of about $ 77,000-$ 81,000.

Current mobility patterns over-rely on transport modes that do not benefit sustainable and healthy lifestyles. To explore the potential for active mobility, we conducted a randomized experiment aimed at increasing regular commuter cycling in cities. In designing the experiment, we teamed up with developers of the “Cyclers” smartphone app to improve the effectiveness of the app by evaluating financial and non-financial motivational features. Participants in the experiment were recruited among new users of the app, and were randomly assigned to one of four different motivational treatments (smart gamification, two variants of a financial reward, and a combination of smart gamification and a financial reward) or a control group (no specific motivation). Our analysis suggests that people can be effectively motivated to engage in more frequent commuter cycling with incentives via a smartphone app. Offering small financial rewards seems to be more effective than smart gamification. A combination of both motivational treatments—smart gamification and financial rewards—may work the same or slightly better than financial rewards alone. We demonstrate that small financial rewards embedded in smartphone apps such as “Cyclers” can be effective in nudging people to commute by bike more often.

The aim of this paper is to understand public preferences for several future scenarios of achieving a healthier, more equitable and sustainable Europe, which differ in the way the society is organized (individualistically vs. collectively) and in the driving sector (public vs. private). To achieve this aim, we conducted a questionnaire survey using representative samples for five European countries in 2018. About three thousand respondents chose among the four scenarios presented within four different contexts (green spaces, active mobility, energy-efficient housing, food consumption) or none of them. A majority of people in the five European countries were ready to accept one of the scenarios. We found significant differences in preferences according to socioeconomic backgrounds and values of respondents. People above 35 years old, those who were less educated, and those in the lowest household income tertile were less supportive of all scenarios. The heterogeneity in preferences associated with differences in socioeconomic backgrounds was larger for the scenario in which society is organized individualistically and driven by the private sector. Smaller distinctions were found in case of the scenario in which society is organized collectively and is driven by the public sector. Departing from social psychological theories, we examine the role of altruistic, biospheric, egoistic, hedonic, and security values. People with stronger biospheric values were more likely to accept scenarios, particularly those which are driven by the public sector and where there is more collective organisation. Those with a more egoistic value orientation were more likely to have higher preferences for scenarios where the private sector had a dominant role. The policy implications, in terms of the selection and framing of policy measures to enhance public support, are discussed. © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. The survey was developed in the scope of the INHERIT project (www.inherit.eu) funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 667364. Data analysis was supported by the FE3M project funded by the EXPRO programme of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic under grant agreement No. 19-26812X.

This report draws out dimensions of good practice for building this triple-win, based on learning from the INHERIT project’s 15 case studies. In the context of the project, good practice refers to ways that support changing contexts and create conditions to enable behaviour change to reach the triple-win. This report summarises key information for consideration by governmental and non-governmental policy-makers and practitioners planning to work across sectors to achieve the triple-win through behaviour change at every level.\ud\udINHERIT researchers have focused their evaluations of the 15 INHERIT case studies on implementation, intersectoral cooperation, impacts and cost benefits. The researchers have taken dimensions of good practice from INHERIT research to be those elements that appear to be promising or necessary in the contexts in which the INHERIT cases studies are implemented. The extent to which these elements of good practice can be generalised to other contexts merits consideration in developing future initiatives towards creating synergies across sectors.\ud\udINHERIT researchers have drawn out lessons learned from information gathered in evaluations about triggers for the initiatives, key elements for implementation, success factors in intersectoral cooperation, what could have been done better, what should be done in the future, and the most important learnings from the evaluation of outcomes, costs and benefits.