Abstract

On-road electric vehicle recharging infrastructure is essential in the transformation of electric vehicles into a practical transportation option. This study focuses upon assessing the need for recharging infrastructure for long distance travel for a large market share of electric vehicles, finding the optimal infrastructure deployment, and understanding the economic, social and environmental costs and benefits associated with the optimal infrastructure deployment. The analysis considers quick-charging and battery-switching as plausible recharging technologies. Results show: (i) the promotion of electric vehicles is beneficial when considering economic costs and benefits for operators and users, tax redistribution, and environmental externalities, even with a relatively modest market share; (ii) the number of required recharging stations for satisfaction of the travel demand is at the magnitude of 1–2% of the current gasoline infrastructure, under the assumption of wide availability of off-road recharging at home and the workplace; (iii) the optimal deployment of the recharging stations is along the main national highways outside of urban conurbations, under the assumption of wide availability of home recharging; (iv) the battery-switching technology is far more attractive to the consumer than the quick-charging technology for long-distance travel requiring more than one recharging visit. Document type: Part of book or chapter of book

Abstract

This paper examines the association between the intensity, timing, and persistence of personal history of mobility on individual support for redistribution. Using both rounds of the Life in Transition Survey, the paper builds measures of downward mobility for about 57,000 individuals from 27 countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The analysis finds that more intensive, recent, and persistent downward mobility increases support for redistribution more. A number of extensions and checks are done by, among others, taking into account systematic bias in perceived mobility experience, considering an alternative definition of redistributive preferences, and exploring the severity of omitted variable bias problems. Overall, the results are robust. Document type: Book

Abstract

“Shared prosperity” is a common phrase in current development policy discourse. Its most widely used operational definition—the growth rate in the average income of the poorest 40% of a country’s population—is a truncated measure of change in social welfare. A related concept, the shared prosperity premium—the difference between the growth rate of the mean for the bottom 40% and the growth rate in the overall mean—is similarly analogous to a measure of change in inequality. This article reviews the relationship between these concepts and the more established ideas of social welfare, poverty, inequality, and mobility."/p" "p"Household survey data can be used to shed light on recent progress in terms of this indicator globally. During 2008–2013, mean incomes for the poorest 40% rose in 60 of the 83 countries for which we have data. In 49 of them, accounting for 65% of the sampled population, it rose "italic"faster"/italic" than overall average incomes, thus narrowing the income gap."/p" "p"In the policy space, there are examples both of “pre-distribution” policies (which promote human capital investment among the poor) and “re-distribution” policies (such as targeted safety nets), which when well-designed have a sound empirical track record of both raising productivity and improving well-being among the poor. Document type: Book