Davide Pace
LightNews LightNews
ddpace.bsky.social
Davide Pace
@ddpace.bsky.social
830 followers 370 following 63 posts
Behavioral economist at LMU Munich - opinions are mine.

Working on: cognitive economics and climate change.

https://sites.google.com/view/davidedpace
Posts Replies Media Videos
Pinned
ddpace.bsky.social
Davide Pace @ddpace.bsky.social · Nov 21
#EconSky 📉📈

A new simple way to boost support for carbon pricing!

New article in @natureportfolio.bsky.social

- Public support is maximized by a Climate Premium: a fixed, uniform, upfront compensation

- Experts are too pessimistic about public support

- A novel incentivized design.

🧵 + link👇
Reposted by Davide Pace
rationalitycrc.bsky.social
📣 Call for Papers | Riederau Workshop on People’s Understanding of and Support for Economic Policies

We are pleased to announce the Riederau Workshop on People’s Understanding of and Support for Economic Policies, taking place 8–10 September 2026 in Riederau am Ammersee (Germany).
Workshop Homepage
econexperiments.eu
January 20, 2026 at 12:55 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
georgweizsaecker.bsky.social
Urgency everywhere, but there are also reasons for 🇪🇺 leaders to play the long game (react calmly) even though MAGA is criminal & dangerous.

1. maximum support for 🇺🇦, keeping 🇺🇸 on the team

2. buy time for military, tech, trade

3. AfD & Co can't score if people are more anti MAGA than gov't
tilmane.bsky.social Tilman @tilmane.bsky.social · 19d
Europe is in a two-front conflict over #Ukraine and #Greenland. So the EU Anti-Coercion Instrument needs to be leveraged now:

Ban X, Foxnews and Grok

Boycott FIFA2026 in US

extra tariffs for Google, Apple, Meta revenues

Introduce high tariffs on US agriculture

open.substack.com/pub/tilmanei...
Europe – How to survive a two-front conflict over Greenland and Ukraine?
Version 1, January 17th
open.substack.com
January 18, 2026 at 10:29 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
sophieintveld.bsky.social
If grovelling to Trump is meant to buy us time to end our dependency on the US, you’d expect feverish activity in Europe to rapidly become autonomous. So has Europe made good use of the time it has bought with self-humiliation? It has not. My blog:

open.substack.com/pub/sophiein...
Playtime is over
Europe cannot afford to waste more time
open.substack.com
January 7, 2026 at 10:30 AM
ddpace.bsky.social
"Europeans can be proud of their development model"

Indeed!

Time to decouple from the US and fly the flag of the liberal and welfare state our forefathers built after WWII.

🇪🇺 We can be a better beacon for the free world. 🇪🇺
eastangliabylines.co.uk East Anglia Bylines @eastangliabylines.co.uk · Jan 2
The story of Europe’s economic decline while US is 'soaring' is everywhere.

But it is wrong. It is a myth.

Europe delivers more leisure, longer life expectancy, less inequality than the US.

Gabriel Zucman dismantles the myths.
Decline, what decline? The myth of dying Europe
There is a widespread view that, by comparison with the USA, Europe is in economic and social decline. But, Zucman argues, it's not true
eastangliabylines.co.uk
January 3, 2026 at 11:23 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
econmunich.bsky.social
📢Call for Applications: Munich Graduate School of Economics (MGSE) @lmumuenchen.bsky.social is inviting applications for fully funded doctoral positions starting October 2026!

❗ Deadline: Jan 31, 2026

Online application tool: lmy.de/SKRWv

More info: lmy.de/ZLXgm
December 16, 2025 at 12:07 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
rationalitycrc.bsky.social
How information campaigns can fall short even if they successfully correct beliefs: Our experiments show that correcting consumers' large underestimations of which products cause high emissions does not have an effect on their actual consumption decisions.
Correcting misunderstandings about CO2 emissions doesn’t help to fight climate change
Imai, Pace, Schwardmann & van der Weele "Correcting Consumer Misperceptions About CO2 Emissions" CRC Discussion Paper No. 529
190researchblog.substack.com
December 15, 2025 at 12:00 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
georgweizsaecker.bsky.social
In 2025 this youthy conference was fantastic

👇🏼 for 2026

#Econsky
bsoeberlin.bsky.social Berlin School of Economics @bsoeberlin.bsky.social · Dec 11
📣 Call for Papers

Join us for the 2nd Berlin PhD Conference in Economics on July 6-8, 2026.

🗓 July 6-8, 2026
⏰ Application deadline: 25 January 2026

🔗 Learn more & apply: berlinschoolofeconomics.de/event-detail...

@wzb.bsky.social @hertieschool.bsky.social #phdconference
December 11, 2025 at 4:24 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
eayeconomists.bsky.social
🚨 Call for Papers!

The 2026 EAYE Annual Meeting will take place at the University of the Basque Country 🇪🇸 on 18–20 May 2026

📅 Submit your paper or extended abstract by 1 Dec 2025 via CMT

#EAYE2026
September 22, 2025 at 8:06 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
aalrababah.bsky.social
🚨 New working paper alert 🚨
Missing summer — and the Tour de France? Don’t worry, we got you covered. 🚴‍♂️🚴‍♂️🚴‍♂️
In this paper, we show that being on the route of Tour de France reduces far-right voting. osf.io/preprints/so...
September 16, 2025 at 10:25 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
pkrugman.bsky.social
If you think the attack on the Fed's Lisa Cook has nothing to do with you, you're wrong — any one of us may be next paulkrugman.substack.com/p/we-are-all...
We Are All Lisa Cook
Nobody is safe from weaponized government
paulkrugman.substack.com
August 25, 2025 at 12:49 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
hansonmark.bsky.social
If I could change one thing about #ScientificPublishing I'd ask funding bodies to stipulate all work they fund be published in non-profit journals.

The knock-on effects would alleviate most of the strain on #AcademicSky.

This isn't hard. It's big, but actually, it's pretty easy.

1/n
The strain on scientific publishing
Abstract. Scientists are increasingly overwhelmed by the volume of articles being published. The total number of articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science has grown exponentially in recent years; ...
direct.mit.edu
August 4, 2025 at 8:10 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
carlbergstrom.com
A few months ago, Nature published how-to guide for using ChatGPT to write your peer reviews in 30 minutes.

This is, of course, a horrible idea. Here’s my response with @jbakcoleman.bsky.social .
AI, peer review and the human activity of science
When researchers cede their scientific judgement to machines, we lose something important.
www.nature.com
June 25, 2025 at 1:01 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
paolocrosetto.bsky.social
Springer-Nature launched a series of "Discover" journals that closely mimic MDPI titles -- sharing *identical* journal names, and likely similar business model.

What is going on, and why researcher will - as always - fall for it?

A 🧵

the-strain-on-scientific-publishing.github.io/website/post...
Springer Nature Discovers MDPI – The Strain on Scientific Publishing
Home page for the paper ‘The Strain on Scientific Publishing’ by Mark A Hanson, Dan Brockington, Paolo Crosetto and Pablo Gomez Barreiro
the-strain-on-scientific-publishing.github.io
June 15, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
paolocrosetto.bsky.social
If you are a scientist in any field or just plainly a curious human being do subscribe to Andrea's substack. It contains and will keep delivering the most unexpected "oh! I didn't know that! Makes sense!" moments in your near future.
andreamatranga.bsky.social Andrea Matranga @andreamatranga.bsky.social · Jun 5
I created a Substack! for now it's mainly a place I post lightly edited versions of my long threads.
The next post will be an explainer of
@Natkhov and myself's paper on the introduction of serfdom in Russia in response to nomadic slave raids. Sign up here
andreamatranga.substack.com
Andrea Matranga | Substack
This substack collects explanations of my projects and interests, mostly relating to Economics, History and Geography. Click to read Andrea Matranga, a Substack publication. Launched 27 minutes ago.
andreamatranga.substack.com
June 6, 2025 at 11:56 AM
ddpace.bsky.social
How do social interactions foster or hamper delusional beliefs?

This is the most pressing open question in the literature on motivated beliefs.

Great to see progress being made 👇
joelvdweele.bsky.social Joel van der Weele @joelvdweele.bsky.social · May 20
New working paper alert: we provide a model of post-hoc rationalizations, driven by motives of (self-)esteem. We show how this can lead to groupthink, polarization, and a preference for echo chambers.

www.ifo.de/sites/defaul...
May 21, 2025 at 7:55 AM
ddpace.bsky.social
"Voters Like Climate Policies More Than You Think".

New policy piece for EconPol Forum based on recent research findings

www.ifo.de/en/econpol/p...

Key messages:
1️⃣ Voters are willing to make sacrifices for climate
change, and they endorse costly climate policies

#EconSky #ClimateChange
1/3
Voters Like Climate Policies More Than You Think | ifo Institute
Key Messages Voters are willing to make sacrifices for climate change, and they endorse costly climate policies. Voters support green investments even when the investments are funded via carbon taxes....
www.ifo.de
May 5, 2025 at 8:21 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
simoncolumbus.bsky.social
"pre-registration has now become mainstream in experimental economics"

New preprint by Taisuke Imai et al.: osf.io/preprints/me...
Abstract: The open science movement has gained significant momentum over the past decade, with pre-registration and the use of pre-analysis plans being central to ongoing debates. Combining observational evidence on trends in adoption with survey data from 519 re-searchers, this study examines the adoption of pre-registration (potentially but not necessarily including pre-analysis plans) in experimental economics. Pooling statistics from 19 leading journals published between 2017 and 2023, we observe that the number of papers containing a pre-registration grew from seven per year to 190 per year. Our findings indicate that pre-registration has now become mainstream in experimental economics, with two-thirds of respondents expressing favorable views and 86% having pre-registered at least one study. However, opinions are divided on the scope and comprehensiveness of pre-registration, highlighting the need for clearer guidelines. Researchers assign a credibility premium to pre-registered tests, although the exact channels remain to be understood. Our results suggest growing support for open science practices among experimental economists, with demand for professional associations to guide researchers and reviewers on best practices for pre-registration and other open science initiatives.
April 7, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
labsquare.net
🔔 Call for Participation 🔔
Lab² is inviting researchers to take part in a multi-analyst study on the effects of having daughters on various outcomes.
Join this metascience project as a co-author and gain the opportunity to work with SOEP data!
#ManyDaughters
Many Analysts
www.manydaughters.com
March 31, 2025 at 12:04 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
adrien-fabre.bsky.social
🤩🤩 Paper finally out in the AER!

With my co-authors (incl. @bluebery-planterose.com & @s-stantcheva.bsky.social) we surveyed climate attitudes in 20 countries covering 72% of global emissions.

In brief, people want ambitious, global, and fair climate policies. A 🧵⬇️

www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=...
April 1, 2025 at 12:38 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
oechssler.bsky.social
I have a postdoc position in Behavioral/Experimental Economics available for 6 years, at the oldest university in Germany in beautiful Heidelberg. Please forward to anyone who might be interested!

#EconJobs #AcademicJobs #HigherEd #Economics #JobAlert
March 27, 2025 at 11:18 AM
ddpace.bsky.social
Last few hours to square your contribution to 🇺🇦!
tderyugina.bsky.social Tatyana Deryugina @tderyugina.bsky.social · Mar 8
Check out a novel way to give to Ukraine with maximum impact. Pledge the max you're willing to give and if the same number of people do the same, your contribution gets squared.

Ends March 10, so hurry. More details here.

yourcontributionsquared.eu/en/
Your Contribution Squared
yourcontributionsquared.eu
March 9, 2025 at 5:19 PM
Reposted by Davide Pace
jburnmurdoch.ft.com
NEW: The actions of Trump and Vance in recent weeks highlight something under-appreciated.

The American right is now ideologically closer to countries like Russia, Turkey and in some senses China, than to the rest of the west (even the conservative west).

My column: www.ft.com/content/3046...
March 7, 2025 at 9:58 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
csteinwender.bsky.social
we are looking for an Associate Professor (tenure track) in applied Economics, pls share: www.timeshighereducation.com/unijobs/list...
Professorship (W2) of AI in Economics - Munich (City), Bavaria, Germany job with LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITAET MUENCHEN | 389325
All AI that are relevant to the field of economics under the application of modern statistical methods will be expected to teach courses at all levels
www.timeshighereducation.com
March 6, 2025 at 8:55 AM
Reposted by Davide Pace
carlbergstrom.com
Let's talk about this Nature piece in more detail.

I've rarely read something so anti-scientific anywhere short of the National Review.

www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Three AI-powered steps to faster, smarter peer review
Tired of spending countless hours on peer reviews? An AI-assisted workflow could help.
www.nature.com
March 6, 2025 at 5:34 AM