New IZA DPs -- Academics
0 views
Skip to first unread message
IZA DP Alerts
May 17, 2026, 9:09:00 AMMay 17
to it...@umich.edu
IZA Discussion Papers
Dear Italo Gutierrez,
These new IZA Discussion Papers are now available online.
DP 18561 - Checchi/De Fraja/Marra/Verzillo:
Italian Academics and External Activities: An Ineffective Reform?
DP 18563 - Marchesi/Ponzo/Scoppa/Spanò:
The Matthew Effect in Literary Careers: Does Early Success Foster Future Success?
DP 18578 - Agarwal/Angeli/Gaule:
The “Missing Nobels”
DP 18603 - Gertsberg:
Diversity and Access in Academic Finance Seminars
Please find the abstracts and download links below.
IZA DP No. 18561
Daniele Checchi, Gianni De Fraja, Alfredo Marra, Stefano Verzillo:
Italian Academics and External Activities: An Ineffective Reform?
Abstract:
We investigate the impact of a reform introduced in Italy in 2010 (Law 240/2010, known as the Gelmini reform) that aimed to liberalise external economic activities for academics, whose pay had been effectively frozen for the previous seven years. The reform partially liberalised remunerated external activities while simultaneously restructuring university governance to expand institutional autonomy and strengthen central assessment of academic performance. Using administrative data from a representative sample of Italian academics, we compute both extensive (participation) and intensive (incidence relative to salary) margins of external activities. Our main finding is that the reform did not alter the behaviour of Italian academics. Among the possible explanations, we suggest the substantial leeway to restrict academics’ remunerated external activities enjoyed by universities’ administration under the new governance framework and the interpretations in the Court of Auditors, which also restricted the range of permissible activities.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18561.pdf
IZA DP No. 18563
Silvia Marchesi, Michela Ponzo, Vincenzo Scoppa, Idola Francesca Spanò:
The Matthew Effect in Literary Careers: Does Early Success Foster Future Success?
Abstract:
The “Matthew effect” refers to a “rich-get-richer” mechanism whereby early success shapes subsequent achievement. We examine whether this mechanism operates in literary careers by analyzing whether early commercial or critical success leads to cumulative advantages in authors’ subsequent works. Using weekly bestseller data for Italian fiction spanning 1975–2025 and exploiting a panel structure at the author–book level, we estimate both baseline OLS models and an Event Study Design. We consider multiple definitions of success, including winning a major literary prize and sustained presence on bestseller lists. Our findings show that prize-based success has virtually no effect on the performance of subsequent books, whereas sustained bestseller success is associated with a small but positive effect on future success. This divergence is likely driven by the fact that literary prizes often induce readers to consume books that fall outside their usual preferences. Our results are robust across alternative specifications, and the positive effect of bestseller success is stronger for younger authors, for women and for books published in more recent decades.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18563.pdf
IZA DP No. 18578
Ruchir Agarwal, Deivis Angeli, Patrick Gaule:
The “Missing Nobels”
Abstract:
Prestigious prizes can shape scientists' career decisions, effort allocation, and field entry, yet the structure of recognition has not kept pace with modern discovery. We screen roughly 2{,}700 international scientific prizes and rank the 99 most prestigious using an index of expert survey ratings, demand for prize information, media news mentions, prize money, and longevity. Three patterns stand out. First, half of today's top prizes were first given after 1980 and one-third after 2000, showing new awards can rise to prominence. Second, recognition is unevenly distributed across fields: physics, life sciences, and mathematics are heavily recognized relative to field size, while computer science, engineering, psychology, and the social sciences are under-served. Third, incentive design is narrow: only three of the top 99 prizes target early-career scientists, and most lack mechanisms to promote future research. These findings inform the design of recognition systems that bet ter align with contemporary science.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18578.pdf
IZA DP No. 18603
Marina Gertsberg:
Diversity and Access in Academic Finance Seminars
Abstract:
Academic seminars are a central mechanism through which the finance profession allocates visibility, feedback, and network access. Using a new panel of 8,744 external seminars at 74 U.S. finance departments from 2010 to 2024, I document five stylized facts. First, female representation rose from 10% to 25%, outpacing growth in the female share of the finance faculty. Second, seminar presenters are positively selected on research visibility: relative to same-institution faculty, they have substantially more publications, Top-3 publications, and citations, and this premium is no larger for women than for men. Third, seminar matching is strongly hierarchical: lower-ranked departments invite upward, whereas top departments draw from a broader range of tiers. Fourth, geographic reach is greater for elite-affiliated and senior scholars. Fifth, seminar opportunities are highly concentrated, with the top 10% of presenters accounting for 43% of all talks. The evidence shows that finan ce seminars have become more gender-inclusive while remaining strongly selective and hierarchical.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18603.pdf
These new IZA Discussion Papers are now available online.
DP 18561 - Checchi/De Fraja/Marra/Verzillo:
Italian Academics and External Activities: An Ineffective Reform?
DP 18563 - Marchesi/Ponzo/Scoppa/Spanò:
The Matthew Effect in Literary Careers: Does Early Success Foster Future Success?
DP 18578 - Agarwal/Angeli/Gaule:
The “Missing Nobels”
DP 18603 - Gertsberg:
Diversity and Access in Academic Finance Seminars
Please find the abstracts and download links below.
IZA DP No. 18561
Daniele Checchi, Gianni De Fraja, Alfredo Marra, Stefano Verzillo:
Italian Academics and External Activities: An Ineffective Reform?
Abstract:
We investigate the impact of a reform introduced in Italy in 2010 (Law 240/2010, known as the Gelmini reform) that aimed to liberalise external economic activities for academics, whose pay had been effectively frozen for the previous seven years. The reform partially liberalised remunerated external activities while simultaneously restructuring university governance to expand institutional autonomy and strengthen central assessment of academic performance. Using administrative data from a representative sample of Italian academics, we compute both extensive (participation) and intensive (incidence relative to salary) margins of external activities. Our main finding is that the reform did not alter the behaviour of Italian academics. Among the possible explanations, we suggest the substantial leeway to restrict academics’ remunerated external activities enjoyed by universities’ administration under the new governance framework and the interpretations in the Court of Auditors, which also restricted the range of permissible activities.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18561.pdf
IZA DP No. 18563
Silvia Marchesi, Michela Ponzo, Vincenzo Scoppa, Idola Francesca Spanò:
The Matthew Effect in Literary Careers: Does Early Success Foster Future Success?
Abstract:
The “Matthew effect” refers to a “rich-get-richer” mechanism whereby early success shapes subsequent achievement. We examine whether this mechanism operates in literary careers by analyzing whether early commercial or critical success leads to cumulative advantages in authors’ subsequent works. Using weekly bestseller data for Italian fiction spanning 1975–2025 and exploiting a panel structure at the author–book level, we estimate both baseline OLS models and an Event Study Design. We consider multiple definitions of success, including winning a major literary prize and sustained presence on bestseller lists. Our findings show that prize-based success has virtually no effect on the performance of subsequent books, whereas sustained bestseller success is associated with a small but positive effect on future success. This divergence is likely driven by the fact that literary prizes often induce readers to consume books that fall outside their usual preferences. Our results are robust across alternative specifications, and the positive effect of bestseller success is stronger for younger authors, for women and for books published in more recent decades.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18563.pdf
IZA DP No. 18578
Ruchir Agarwal, Deivis Angeli, Patrick Gaule:
The “Missing Nobels”
Abstract:
Prestigious prizes can shape scientists' career decisions, effort allocation, and field entry, yet the structure of recognition has not kept pace with modern discovery. We screen roughly 2{,}700 international scientific prizes and rank the 99 most prestigious using an index of expert survey ratings, demand for prize information, media news mentions, prize money, and longevity. Three patterns stand out. First, half of today's top prizes were first given after 1980 and one-third after 2000, showing new awards can rise to prominence. Second, recognition is unevenly distributed across fields: physics, life sciences, and mathematics are heavily recognized relative to field size, while computer science, engineering, psychology, and the social sciences are under-served. Third, incentive design is narrow: only three of the top 99 prizes target early-career scientists, and most lack mechanisms to promote future research. These findings inform the design of recognition systems that bet ter align with contemporary science.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18578.pdf
IZA DP No. 18603
Marina Gertsberg:
Diversity and Access in Academic Finance Seminars
Abstract:
Academic seminars are a central mechanism through which the finance profession allocates visibility, feedback, and network access. Using a new panel of 8,744 external seminars at 74 U.S. finance departments from 2010 to 2024, I document five stylized facts. First, female representation rose from 10% to 25%, outpacing growth in the female share of the finance faculty. Second, seminar presenters are positively selected on research visibility: relative to same-institution faculty, they have substantially more publications, Top-3 publications, and citations, and this premium is no larger for women than for men. Third, seminar matching is strongly hierarchical: lower-ranked departments invite upward, whereas top departments draw from a broader range of tiers. Fourth, geographic reach is greater for elite-affiliated and senior scholars. Fifth, seminar opportunities are highly concentrated, with the top 10% of presenters accounting for 43% of all talks. The evidence shows that finan ce seminars have become more gender-inclusive while remaining strongly selective and hierarchical.
https://docs.iza.org/dp18603.pdf
IZA DP Alerts | www.iza.org
If you have trouble downloading the papers, or for any other questions regarding the IZA Discussion Paper Series, please contact iza...@liser.lu.
IZA@LISER Network
Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER)
11, Porte des Sciences, L-4366 Esch-sur-Alzette / Belval
Privacy Policy | Manage your subscriptions
If you have trouble downloading the papers, or for any other questions regarding the IZA Discussion Paper Series, please contact iza...@liser.lu.
IZA@LISER Network
Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER)
11, Porte des Sciences, L-4366 Esch-sur-Alzette / Belval
Privacy Policy | Manage your subscriptions
IZA DP Alerts
May 17, 2026, 9:10:54 AMMay 17
to italo...@gmail.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages