Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
Popular Media From big-box and grocery stores to airlines, “dynamic pricing” — where prices fluctuate in real-time based on supply and demand — is poised to become a larger part . . .
From big-box and grocery stores to airlines, “dynamic pricing” — where prices fluctuate in real-time based on supply and demand — is poised to become a larger part of the American shopping experience.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM With the release of the U.S. Supreme Court’s NetChoice opinion (along with some other boring case people seem to want to talk about), opinions for the October 2023 term . . .
With the release of the U.S. Supreme Court’s NetChoice opinion (along with some other boring case people seem to want to talk about), opinions for the October 2023 term appear to be complete. After discussing what Murthy v. Missouri means for online speech, it only feels right to discuss the other big social-media case of the term.
Scholarship ABSTRACT This monograph surveys the rich history of entrepreneurship research within and inspired by the “Austrian” school of economics. Unlike most schools of the past . . .
This monograph surveys the rich history of entrepreneurship research within and inspired by the “Austrian” school of economics. Unlike most schools of the past 150 years or so, the Austrian tradition places entrepreneurship at the heart of economic theory and practice. Understanding the entrepreneurial “function” in society is vital for explaining the real-world market process, but also for a proper understanding of the fundamental concepts and theories of economics. These include action, choice, exchange, prices, supply and demand, money, capital, competition, economic development, and business cycles, to name only a few. In this monograph we survey the development of Austrian theories of entrepreneurship, examining the contributions of leading members of the tradition in addition to those of some lesserknown writers, adjacent scholars, and fellow-travelers. We then explore some ways in which Austrian work contributes to modern entrepreneurship research, especially through the Judgment-Based Approach. We conclude with a discussion of the professional roles now played by Austrians in the contemporary entrepreneurship discipline.
Popular Media A case pending at the U.S. Supreme Court stems from the efforts a multitude of federal agencies made to remove certain viewpoints from public view. . . .
A case pending at the U.S. Supreme Court stems from the efforts a multitude of federal agencies made to remove certain viewpoints from public view. In other words, they sought to abridge freedom of speech—you know, that thing that the First Amendment explicitly bans.
TOTM After a lot of anticipation from Supreme Court watchers, the Murthy v. Missouri opinion has finally been released. As the oral argument suggested, standing was . . .
After a lot of anticipation from Supreme Court watchers, the Murthy v. Missouri opinion has finally been released. As the oral argument suggested, standing was the issue for the Court, who in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett ruled that none of the plaintiffs had standing, due to a lack of traceability and redressability of the alleged injuries. The result: challenging backdoor censorship just got a lot harder.
Regulatory Comments We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, are writing to express our serious concerns about SB 1047, the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence . . .
We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, are writing to express our serious concerns about SB 1047, the Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Systems Act. We believe that the bill, as currently written, would have severe unintended consequences that could stifle innovation, harm California’s economy, and undermine America’s global leadership in AI.
Our main concerns with SB 1047 are as follows:
These restrictions on open-source AI models would undermine a key driver of innovation and collaboration in the field. The vast majority of stakeholders, including large tech companies, startups, the broader business community, academia, and civil society organizations like the Center for American Progress, have voiced support for open-source AI development. Open-source AI has also thus far played an essential role in interpretability and safety research; by limiting access to future open-source models, this bill could undermine progress in those vital fields.
We believe that SB 1047, if enacted in its current form, would have a chilling effect on AI research and development in California and potentially across the United States. It could slow down progress in a field that holds immense promise for advancing scientific understanding, improving medicine, and driving economic growth.
While we share the goal of ensuring that AI is developed and deployed responsibly, we urge you to reconsider the approach taken in SB 1047. The bill is also broadly inconsistent with the legislative direction suggested by the United States Senate’s Bipartisan Working Group on AI; if SB 1047 passes, California likely would be an unfortunate outlier in the broader context of American policy stances toward AI. In conclusion, we respectfully request that you either make substantial changes to SB 1047 to address the concerns outlined above or withdraw the bill entirely. We stand ready to work with you to find a path forward that promotes innovation while also ensuring the safe and responsible development of AI technology.
Sincerely,
Neil Chilson, Head of AI Policy,, Abundance Institute
Kristian Stout, Director of Innovation Policy, International Center for Law & Economics
Lisa B. Nelson, CEO, ALEC Action
Logan Kolas, Director of Technology Policy, American Consumer Institute
Daniel Castro, Director, Center for Data Innovation
Taylor Barkley, Director of Public Policy, Abundance Institute
Adam Thierer, Resident Senior Fellow, Technology & Innovation, R Street Institute
Vance Ginn, Ph.D., Former Chief Economist, White House Office of Management and Budget
Jessica Melugin, Director, Center for Technology and Innovation, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Nathan Leamer, Executive Director, Digital First Project
TOTM The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major victory for free speech and struck a blow against government censorship-by-proxy yesterday in NRA v. Vullo: “Government officials cannot . . .
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major victory for free speech and struck a blow against government censorship-by-proxy yesterday in NRA v. Vullo: “Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors.”
This is a major decision, and will have implications for free speech online, as the Court must soon consider similar facts in the social-media context in Murthy v. Missouri. But the case also illustrates the dangers that can attend government officials using even valid regulatory authority to strongarm private entities into doing things in ways they couldn’t do directly.
The Court’s unanimous opinion gets it right: “[A] government official cannot do indirectly what she is barred from doing directly… [she] cannot coerce a private party to punish or suppress disfavored speech on her behalf.”
TOTM Artificial intelligence is in the public-policy spotlight. In October 2023, the Biden administration issued its Presidential Executive Order on AI, which directed federal agencies to . . .
Artificial intelligence is in the public-policy spotlight. In October 2023, the Biden administration issued its Presidential Executive Order on AI, which directed federal agencies to cooperate in protecting the public from potential AI-related harms. President Joe Biden said in his March 2024 State of the Union Address that government enforcers will crack down on the use of AI to facilitate illegal price fixing. Congress is in the preliminary stages of considering legislation that could pave the way for future regulation of AI.
TOTM Competition policymakers around the world have been expressing concerns about competition in emerging artificial-intelligence (AI) industries, with some taking steps to investigate them further. These . . .
Competition policymakers around the world have been expressing concerns about competition in emerging artificial-intelligence (AI) industries, with some taking steps to investigate them further. These fears are notably fueled by a sense that incumbent (albeit, in adjacent markets) digital platforms may use strategic partnerships with AI firms to stave off competition from this fast-growing field.