Research Statement
Amelie F. Constant
February 2016
My
educational background has been in the field of labor economics. I
completed my doctoral studies in labor economics and econometrics at
Vanderbilt University in 1998. I specialized in the economics of
migration and my dissertation focused on the economic assimilation of
immigrants in Germany. I completed my Master’s in economic development
(DEA) at the University of Paris II in Paris, France, and wrote my
master’s thesis about the economic power of Japan, the miracle economy of the 1980s. At the same time, I
also pursued studies in European Economics at Paris I (Sorbonne). I
received my undergraduate degree at the University of Athens in Athens,
Greece with a Bachelor’s in Economics and Mathematics. During
my postdoctoral studies at the University of Pennsylvania and the
Population Studies Center I also added economic demography and elements
of sociology and other social sciences in my portfolio. Most recently,
I delved into program eveluation and the methods of randomized control
trials. As a labor
economist, I apply principles of labor, perspectives and frameworks
while I employ econometric techniques to study topics related to
migration, entrepreneurship, education, health and wellbeing with
emphasis on gender differences. My basic motive for research is to
answer questions that can eventually improve the conditions of minority
populations and the marginalized and vulnerable, that they can add to
our knowledge, and can be useful to policymakers and the public. This
is what stimulates me in pursuing research on the economics of
migration. Below,
I summarize and highlight my research. Overall, I have published 62
peer-reviewed articles, edited two books, one Handbook, and three
special issues in refereed international academic journals. My work has
been well received and has been cited by economists, sociologists,
psychologists, and researchers in the health sciences. I
have also received awards in recognition of my research achievements such as
prizes for individual articles. In fact, two of
my papers have ignited scholars to write the theory behind them. I have
another 23 “other publications,” such as Policy Papers, Briefs, Op-Eds,
and Reports that have been heavily cited and received praise by
policymakers, NGOs and stakeholders. Lastly, I have about a dozen
discussion papers that are submitted to journals and I am working on a
number of new projects in the forefront of my field.I
have always been fascinated with human behavior and being an immigrant
myself, it was natural to me to try to understand individual migrant
behavior and fit it in the principles and theory available. Studying
the earnings assimilation of immigrants in Germany by gender and
ethnicity in comparison to natives was the subject of my dissertation. In this empirical work, I
combined the theories of human capital and labor market segmentation to
explain wage differentials in a longitudinal setting. I was one of the first reserachers to employ the
German Socio-Economic Panel in the US in the early 1990s. At the time I was using SAS
(often also C language) and LIMDEP.
I
expanded this work during my postdoctoral work at the University of
Pennsylvania, working with Doug Massey (now at Princeton). Using the
same German Socio-Economic Panel, I examined selection issues, earnings
and the out-migration of immigrants as well as the labor market segmentation of guestworkers. Later, at IZA, with
Klaus Zimmermann I extended this work looking at repeat,
circular and return migration of immigrants. For this work, I brought
the use of Markov chains and created a model in which at each state
people decide whether to stay in Germany or return home and whether to
stay abroad or return to back to Germany. Applying this to German data,
Zimmermann and I were the first to show that having the German passport
makes immigrants more likely to return and not having it, makes them
more likely to stay in Germany.
When
I started working at IZA in 2002, I also brought my self-employment
work with me. I extended this research (with Zimmermann) to the
entrepreneurial endeavors of immigrants in Germany, while comparing
them to native Germans. This work on entrepreneurship was very new and
timely. Very hew papers had examined entrepreneurship and the
self-employment of immigrants especially in Germany. In the article The
Making of Entrepreneurs in Germany: Are Native Men and Immigrants
Alike? (published in Small Business Economics with Zimmermann), I
provided new methods and empirics and showed that the self-employed
fare better than others. But do immigrant women also go into
self-employment and do they fare well? Looking at immigrant
businesswomen in Germany and
comparing them to German natives I authored two papers published in
Kyklos and in the International Journal of Manpower. My idea in these
papers was that businesswomen need not only be self-employed. Women in
companies with decision-making power take just as high risks and make
fast decisions as the self-employed ones do. Thus they are de-facto
businesswomen.
In
the mid-2000s and in combination with a big grant of about USD 800,000
from the Volkswagen Foundation, and following Akerlof and Kranton, I
incorporated the idea of “identity” in my research agenda (with
Zimmermann). This work on the ethnic identity of immigrants was
innovative; a trendsetter. Zimmermann and I were the first to bring
these ideas from social psychology, sociology and even political
science to economics. The empirical index of the ethnic identity of
immigrants, the ethnosizer, that Zimmermann and I created actually
measures how ethnic or not a person is irrespective of their country of
origin. For example, an Indian and a Pakistani can score the same
number of being ethnic in the host country. In an
original article "Ethnosizing
Immigrants," published in the Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organization (2009), we identified four states in which an immigrant can
be: assimilation, integration, marginalization, and separation. The
ethnosizer and related concepts of ethnic diversity, are been since
studied by many colleagues. This empirical work inspired the creation
of the theory behind it by Epstein and Goldner, published in the
IZAJoM.
I
further studied the ethnosizer and its impact on labor market outcomes
such as labor force participation, earnings, housing, etc. The idea
being that people who cling on to their ethnic identity may make
different choices and end up at different equilibria, not necessarily
the maxima according to neoclassical economics. "Measuring Ethnic
Identity and Its Impact on Economic Behavior" was published in the
Journal of the European Economic Association in 2008 (with Zimmermann)
and shows for the first time the negative quadrants of ethnic identity
vis-a-vis the home and host country. While provocative and rather
imaginary at the time, ten years later we have evidence of subversive
ethnic identity when immigrants turn against the host country. It
was natural to extend this work and include
the nation-state, which resulted in the “Immigrants, Ethnic Identities
and the Nation-State” (with Zimmermann), a deeply thought about chapter
combining new behavioral economics ideas, and political science.
My research on ethnic identity also found neat applications using Ukrainian
longitudinal data. In this project with M. Kahanec and K. Zimmermann, I
examined the ethnic-earnings divide between ethnic Ukrainians and
ethnic Russians in Ukraine and showed that there are grave ethnic
differences related to language. Accordingly, Russian speaking
individuals earn more than Ukrainian speaking individuals (paper
published in the Economics of Transition, 2012). Extending this work into the
political divide in Ukraine, looking at the Orange Revolution, I
produced another paper (with Kahanec and Zimmermann). Adding specific questions about
the ethnic identity of Ukrainians so we can better study the earnings
differentials and political tensions in the country, will be extremely useful for research.
Adding risk proclivity to the study of immigrants and their
ethnic identity, I produced more papers that provide tremendous insights
in the economic behavior of immigrants in the host country. Using the German Socio-Economic Panel, with
co-authors (H. Bonin, K. Tatsiramos, K. Zimmermann) we brought to light new and unexpected findings about migrants. We were the first to
show empirically that while immigrants may be self-selected to be more
risk-loving than their left-behind compatriots (since they undertake
the trip), they become risk-averse after they arrive and live in the
host country.
In addition, first generation immigrants are less
risk-loving than native Germans and the second generation immigrants
are more risk-loving than the first and approach natives. The article "Ethnic persistence, assimilation and risk
proclivity" published in the IZAJoM (2012) has more than 10,700 downloads.
Employing
other datasets, such as unique and freshly available data on the
unemployed in Germany, I incorporated the ideas of economic
preferences, personality traits, attitudes, and reference standards. In
one paper, in particular, I examine the employability of unemployed
immigrants and how fast they accept a job offer by using their
reservation wages (with A. Krause, U. Rinne, and K. Zimmermann).
Interestingly, we find that the first generation immigrants have lower
reservation wages than comparable native Germans, they actually accept
job offers fast, but they do not stay employed for long and return to
unemployment. In contrast, the second generation immigrants have higher
reservation wages than Germans and stay unemployed longer as they do
not accept job offers easily.
Using
the NLSY, with Spyros Konstantopoulos, I studied the school effects and
labor market outcomes for young adults in the 1980s and 1990s and how
school characteristics are linked to labor market performance, using
multilevel models. This work was interesting in disaggregating the
effects by sex and race in the US. Additional research on education I
did for the “Danish-German” project, a collaborative work between IZA
and Rockwool Foundation, in which we collected data on the same
immigrant groups in the two respective countries. The Danish project
culminated in the book Migrants, Work, and Welfare State
(2005). Besides studying the human capital of immigrants and natives in
a comparative setting, I studied and investigated selection and
earnings,
self-employment, employment trends and welfare benefits (with
co-authors). The
fascinating aspect of this research was to try and disentangle the
cause of wages differentials between immigrants in Denmark and Germany;
reconstructing the counterfactual and identify the country or
individual effect was a big part of this research.
Immigrants
in France were hardly looked at in the early 2000s, mostly due to the
nonavailability of data. In my chapter "Immigrant Adjustment in France
and Impacts on the Natives" (2005), I showed how France and its
Republican ideals of enlightenment has failed to integrate its second
generation immigrants, who are French citizens. To effectively manage
and successfuly integrate immigrants it takes more than written laws.
Institutions, labor markets, economic growth and attitudes are
very important.
The International Handbook on the Economics of
Migration, edited with Zimmermann, is a unique handbook that captures
the present and the future in the field. This is the first handbook to
appear and includes chapters/topics never published before such as
migrants, wages and obesity; child labor migrants; natural disasters
and migration; migration and religiosity; immigrants time use; and the
left behind. While the handbook is commissioned work, it still augments the knowledge in the field because it contains
these new ideas and because of the way we put everything together. The
handbook has been already critically acclaimed and reviewed in Romanian
Journal of Regional Sciences, Population and Development Review, Papers
in Regional Science, Journal of Economic Literature, Eastern Economic
Journal, Journal of Economics, and Canadian Studies in Population.
Ideas from the handbook have since inspired future work in certain
areas, which attests to the quality of the book.
My
current work focuses on topical and emerging socioeconomic issues both
domestically and internationally. I am collaborating with various
colleagues on several different projects. My novel work on migration
and happiness is incorporating the notion of wellbeing (life
satisfaction or happiness) directly into the utility function and
trying to establish a causal relationship between ethnic diversity or
multiculturality and the happiness of natives. In this ground breaking
work (with A. Akay and C. Giulietti) we were the first to study the
impact of immigration (measured by the immigration rate in a locality)
on the happiness of other immigrants and native Germans. The upshot of
this work, published in the Journal of Economic Behavior &
Organization (2014) is that more immigration makes native Germans happy, while
it makes immigrants less happy. Our findings are not driven by reverse
causality, selectivity or confounding local labor market attributes.
The wellbeing domains particularly affected by the immigration rate are
dwelling and leisure. I am proud to say that this novel work inspired
once again the theory behind it by Oded Stark et al. in JEBO (The
impact of the assimilation of migrants on the well-being of native
inhabitants: A theory). In the beginning (as with my previous projects)
quantifying the unquantifiable and bringing other social sciences’
ideas into economics was intriguing and fun. Little did we know that
now we are entirely into a new research area that many colleagues
follow.
Networks,
social capital, spatial distribution and the ethnic capital is a fresh
research that I am currently working on. With colleagues Schueller and
Zimmermann, I try to establish a
causal relationship between ethnic spatial clustering and immigrants’
socio-cultural integration. Using German data, we create a
quasi-experimental setting and test the alternative theories of
cultural conformity and cultural distinction. We find that local
co-ethnic concentration affects immigrants’ ethnic self-identification
and cultural integration, that residential ethnic clustering
strengthens immigrants’ retention of their affiliation with their
country of origin and weakens their identification with the host
country. Our findings are robust to the use of an instrumental variable
approach.Health
and especially the health of older immigrants and natives is a rather
new line of research for me. With colleagues S. Neuman and T.
Garcia-Munoz, we wanted to study and investigate the health status
of immigrants compared to natives. Using the European data SHARE we
show that immigrants in Europe have better self-reported health
than comparable natives when they first arrive in the host country.
Paradoxically, their health deteriorates with additional years of
residence in the host country (a healthy immigrant paradox). However,
our comparison study between 16 European countries and Israel,
revealed a “sick” immigrant effect for Israel. this research deals more with selection
issues and has a strong policy bent. Israel is a unique country in that
it does not impose any health screening or requirements upon
prospective migrants of Jewish decent. To
summarize, I have a long-standing rich research agenda that
incorporates cutting-edge work that aims to ultimately inform important
policy issues. I have been fortunate to work on issues that are not
only important to me, but also significant to many people in different
countries. I also had the privilege to collaborate with exceptional
colleagues with whom I exchanged ideas, learned from, and provided
support to them. Above all, I feel that my experience in interacting
and advising policymakers and decision-makers has enriched me and given
me a better understanding about research and the labor markets. My
policy experience has also validated my position that policy advice
cannot stand alone, but needs to be backed up by evidence-based and
unbiased research.