Abstract
AbstractSince the publication of the Meade Report in 1978 and the establishment of the Fiscal Studies journal in 1979, IFS has been a world leader in the microeconomic analysis of tax policy. Here we document the growing importance of rigorous empirical analysis in our academic and policy research. We point to the expanding reach of IFS research outside the pure analysis of tax policy in the years following the Meade Report and the key role played by the ESRC Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy, established in 1991. This Centre provided the environment for long‐term research across a wide set of fields that has enabled IFS to stay ahead in the policy debate and maintain a leading position in academic research. The breadth and depth of work in tax policy as it impacted on individuals, on families, on the labour market, on firms, on innovation, on retirement, on capital markets and on government revenues are exemplified through the Mirrlees Review. The expansion of IFS research into a broader set of areas, including health, child development and human capital, is captured through the recent launch of the Deaton Review on the causes and consequences of inequality, covering a broad set of inequalities and the challenges they bring to society, to policy and to research.
Highlights
Over the last 50 years, so much has changed in terms of the tools available to researchers
At the point of our first substantive research contributions, public economics research for tax policy purposes was largely theoretical or, if quantitative, typically used illustrative calculations based on representative households and firms or aggregate tax revenues
We have studied the drivers of parental behaviour, which range from financial resources to attitudes and beliefs, as well as the impact of parenting interventions, in developing countries, showing that parental behaviour is a crucial driver of the intergenerational transmission of skills and economic capabilities
Summary
Over the last 50 years, so much has changed in terms of the tools available to researchers. Whilst the nature and scope of our work and the data we access have changed immeasurably since that original proposal, the overarching objectives of the Centre and, by extension, of IFS have always been, and will continue to be, those expressed in that original proposal – namely: (a) to make major scientific progress in understanding how individuals and firms behave and how they react to government policy and, more generally, to the economic and institutional environment; (b) to ensure this knowledge is used to have substantial positive impact on the operation and evaluation of policy across a broad range of areas including inequality, taxation, labour markets, welfare, pensions and, more recently, education, productivity, public finances, health and development; and (c) to build technical and policy capacity by training a new generation of highly skilled researchers. In keeping with the gradual broadening and interconnectedness of research communities around the world and the increased availability of micro data internationally, we have a track record of work on risk pooling, transfers and poverty alleviation in developing countries, including designing and studying interventions such as conditional cash transfer programmes related to health or education, and in-kind transfers designed to help poor households. Our analysis of poverty and living standards in developing countries has had important policy impact – for example, the evidence generated on the long-run impacts of asset transfers to ultra-poor households is being used outside of academia by multiple research partners as well as by other organisations that implement, support and advocate for the asset transfers approach around the globe
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
