Contenu du sommaire

Discriminatory pricing and monopolies in water public services: An analysis of consumers' reaction to the price-signal distortions. Since 2010, the way water tariffs are set in France has changed since local governments can now use increasing-block tariffs. These tariffs, even if they have been thought as second-best optima to monopolies' deadweight losses, are complex to implement to satisfy some other goals. The sub-optimal reactions of consumers to the price signal and the issues of redistribution question the efficacy of the mechanism. This piece of research theoretically analyses the increasing-block tariffs properties. It then empirically tests the reaction of consumers to the price signal from a natural experiment taking place in Dunkerque. Results show that users whose consumption is at the lower or the upper bound react strongly to the marginal price, while it questions the equity of this mechanism which is highly distortive.

Performance of Islamic banks vs. conventional banks: how effective are regulatory capital ratios?
This paper examines the effects of various types of bank regulatory capital on the profitability and the efficiency of conventional and Islamic banks. Using a sample of 656 banks from 1999 to 2013, we find that regulatory capital is positively associated with the efficiency and the profitability of the two bank types, although the results are stronger for conventional banks. The findings also suggest that Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) capital guidelines are more effective in improving the performance of Islamic banks than Basel Committee on Banking and Supervision (BCBS) capital guidelines.

Poverty reduction and work incentives: which policy for youth in France?
This article studies the impact of reforms of the low-income support system targeted at young people in France. Extensions of “RSA socle, activité” and “prime d'activité” to young adults are thus proposed. By distinguishing living arrangement among non-student, we show, using a model of labor supply and a microsimulation model that the different scenarios make it possible to fight the poverty of young people, although the scenarios that include the RSA socle are more effective in this area. It is also these scenarios that create a stronger incentive for work. On the other hand, for young people who live with their parents, these scenarios favor part-time work.

The strange “majority judgment”The “majority judgment” is an evaluative voting rule that picks a candidate with the best median evaluation. This paper deals with the question: What does one do when choosing according to the best median? This principle amounts to find which half-population should be neglected in order to satisfy, in the sense of a Rawlsian compromise, the other half. This principle clashes with the definition of democracy as the participation of everyone, not half of the population plus one. Moreover, providing the highest possible level of satisfaction to that half-population which is the easiest to satisfy is not what is done by the rules called “majoritarian,” that respect the Condorcet principle. On the contrary, these rules favor consensual solutions, in particular in standard political environments. This explains why the majority judgment often yields surprising outcomes.

The article by Laslier [2017] presents a strange description of the new method of voting called “majority judgment,” of its properties, of its supposed paradoxes and antecedents. This response brings clarifications.