People's fairness preferences are an important constraint for what constitutes an acceptable economic
transaction, yet little is known about how these preferences are formed. In this paper, we provide clean
evidence that previous transactions play an important role in shaping perceptions of fairness. Buyers
used to high market prices, for example, are more likely to perceive high prices as fair than buyers
used to low market prices. Similarly, employees used to high wages are more likely to perceive low
wages as unfair. Our data further allows us to decompose this history dependence into the effects of
pure observation vs. the experience of payoff-relevant outcomes. We propose two classes of models
of path-dependent fairness preferences—either based on endogenous fairness reference points or based
on shifts in salience—that can account for our data. Structural estimates of both types of models imply
a substantial deviation from existing history-independent models of fairness. Our results have implications
for price discrimination, labor markets, and dynamic pricing.
The results are in, and the world’s elite higher education institutions have a new champion. The University of Oxford is the best university in the world, according to the results of the 2016-2017 Times Higher Education World University Rankings.
It is the first time that a university from outside the United States has topped the table. It leapfrogs last year’s number one, the California Institute of Technology, and becomes the first new number one in six years. CalTech is number two. Before we look at what this means, here’s the top 10.You can access the full ranking of 980 universities here.
Remarkably, vice-chancellor of the University of Oxford, Louise Richardson, describes the practice of securing the number one spot as “really quite simple”. It’s all about recruiting the best scholars, she says, since “any university is only as good as the academics it can attract”.
And she's right – at least in part. Research performance and academic reputation form a huge part of what makes an institution successful.
But the Times Higher Education rankings are the most comprehensive global rankings going, drawing on 13 separate performance indicators and assessing institutions on their core missions – not only research, but also teaching, knowledge transfer and international outlook.
This allows universities that excel in measures such as staff-to-student ratio, international research collaboration, and income from industry to perform well in the rankings too, and the result is a global ranking that celebrates excellence in higher education across the world. This map shows the range of countries that have an institution in the table this year.
So what do these rankings tell us about the global academic landscape? Times Higher Education has been publishing rankings since 2004, and the 13 datasets published since then tell the story of higher education’s evolution.
Despite Oxford’s headline-grabbing rise to the top of the pile, the rankings’ upper echelons are remarkably stable. While the top two institution’s swapped places, all of the institutions from third down to ninth remain exactly the same year on year. The University of Chicago also hold on to its position (10th) although it is joined this year by the University of California, Berkeley, which rises three places.
Once again, it is the US that has the most institutions in the ranking (148) followed by the United Kingdom (91), Japan (69) and China (52). But it is when you cream off the top 200 positions that you perhaps get a better picture of where the world’s truly elite universities are based.
Here you can see that while China has overtaken everyone but the US, the UK and Japan, when all 980 institutions are considered it slips down to number 10 in the top 200 list. The established European giants – Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland – may have fewer institutions in the overall table, but the calibre of their universities is clear to see.
However, although Western countries continue to dominate the top tier, Asia is becoming increasingly visible as a higher-education power. It is a trend that is well established: since the first rankings were published, Asia’s position has been steadily gaining momentum.
China (mainland) takes four places in this year’s top 200 – up from two last year. South Korea also has four, the same as last year, but every one of its top 200 institutions has climbed to a higher position. Hong Kong, for the record, has five top 200 universities, compared with three in last year’s table.
A big reason for this is money. East Asia, in particular, has invested heavily in higher education in recent years. But reputation also plays a huge part. The Times Higher Education reputation scores are allocated based on 20,000 responses from academics across the world. Year on year, more of them are naming Chinese institutions as the best universities in their field.
Conceito: Despesa primária total não poderá ter crescimento real a partir de 2017; a PEC limitará, pela primeira vez, o crescimento do gasto público e contribuirá para o necessário ajuste estrutural das contas públicas;
Os gastos totais da União, incluídos os Poderes Legislativo (inclusive o TCU) e Judiciário, além de Ministério Público da União e Defensoria Pública da União, serão reajustados com base na inflação oficial (IPCA) do ano anterior;
A despesa primária total inclui os pagamentos de restos a pagar referentes a despesas primárias;
Prazo: 20 anos com possibilidade de revisão da regra de fixação do limite a partir do 10º ano de vigência;
Despesas no primeiro ano: No primeiro ano de vigência (2017), o limite dos gastos totais equivalerá à despesa paga do ano anterior corrigida pela inflação do ano anterior;
Saúde e educação: Valores mínimos dos gastos com saúde e educação da União passarão a ser corrigidos pela variação da inflação do ano anterior e não mais pela receita. É prerrogativa do Congresso Nacional decidir onde os recursos públicos serão alocados, respeitando esse novo piso constitucional caso a PEC seja aprovada.
Exceções: Ficam fora do alcance da PEC as transferências constitucionais a Estados, municípios e Distrito Federal e os créditos extraordinários, além das complementações ao Fundeb, as despesas da Justiça Eleitoral com as eleições e despesas de capitalização de estatais não dependentes.
Descumprimento: Em caso de descumprimento do limite estabelecido para os Poderes e órgãos, o poder que extrapolar o limite ficará proibido no exercício seguinte: conceder vantagem, aumento, reajuste ou adequação de remuneração de servidores públicos, salvo os derivados de sentença judicial ou de determinação legal decorrente de atos anteriores à publicação da PEC; criar cargo, emprego ou função que implique aumento de despesa; alterar estrutura de carreira que implique aumento de despesa; admitir ou contratar pessoal, a qualquer título, ressalvadas a reposição decorrente de aposentadoria ou de falecimento de servidores, e as reposições de cargos de chefia e de direção que não acarretem aumento de despesa; realizar concurso público.
Adicionalmente, no caso de descumprimento do limite pelo Poder Executivo, ficam vedados no exercício seguinte: despesa nominal com subsídios e subvenções econômicas não poderá superar aquela realizada no exercício anterior; concessão ou ampliação de incentivo ou benefício de natureza tributária da qual decorra renúncia de receita.
Postagens
