Welcome!

Economist

Welcome! I am an applied micro- and behavioral economist who uses surveys and experiments to study preferences for redistribution.  My recent work uses large-scale surveys to explore individuals' beliefs about the consequences of inequality, and it establishes such beliefs as an important determinant behind preferences for redistribution. My other work focuses on motivated cognition and social norms with applications in public, labor, and environmental economics.

Until March 2023 I was a Postdoctoral Scholar at the Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality", Thurgau Institute of Economics, and the Department of Economics at University of Konstanz. I hold a Ph.D. in Economics from the Paris School of Economics under the supervision of Nicolas Jacquemet and Claudia Senik. 

Currently, I am an associate researcher at the Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality" at University of Konstanz. I also work as a policy-maker at the German Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy. The content on this website is my own and does not necessarily reflect the view of the ministry.

Contact

Email: lobeckmax@gmail.com

Current Research

The Consequences of Inequality: Beliefs and Redistributive Preferences with Morten Støstad

Working Paper, Conditionally accepted at the American Economic Review

Abstract:     Using two large-scale studies in the United States we document widespread public agreement that inequality leads to negative societal consequences, for example by increasing crime (74 %), harming democratic institutions (57 %), and weakening economic growth (52 %). An information experiment establishes causal evidence that such inequality externality beliefs substantially influence redistributive preferences, with an importance approaching that of economic fairness views. Inequality externality beliefs are less polarized across income levels and political affiliations than fairness views, and have a particularly strong influence on high-income individuals. Our results demonstrate that these previously undocumented beliefs constitute a key determinant of redistributive preferences.

Equity or Externalities: The Redistributive Debates in Norway and the United States with Morten Støstad and Chloé de Meulenaer

Working Paper

Abstract:     We use natural language processing to classify all redistributive speeches in the U.S. Congress and Norwegian parliament from 2015 to 2022. The Norwegian redistributive debate is markedly more pro-redistribution than the U.S. debate. While American legislators invoke fairness to argue for redistribution and efficiency to argue against it, the Norwegian debate does not align with the traditional equity-efficiency divide. Norwegian legislators often argue that inequality itself has socially inefficient consequences, such as lower trust, more crime, or weaker productivity (inequality externalities). In both settings, externality-based arguments are more likely to appeal to logic and consensus, while fairness arguments express more anger and compassion. In a U.S. survey experiment, fairness arguments induce more outrage but are not more convincing on average. Our results document two distinct ways to argue for redistribution, and suggest that the classic equity-efficiency dichotomy could be less universal than often assumed.