Michael A. Livermore
University of Virginia
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Michael A. Livermore.
PLOS ONE | 2015
Mel Win Khaw; Denise A. Grab; Michael A. Livermore; Christian A. Vossler; Paul W. Glimcher
Environmental public goods—including national parks, clean air/water, and ecosystem services—provide substantial benefits on a global scale. These goods have unique characteristics in that they are typically “nonmarket” goods, with values from both use and passive use that accrue to a large number of individuals both in current and future generations. In this study, we test the hypothesis that neural signals in areas correlated with subjective valuations for essentially all other previously studied categories of goods (ventromedial prefrontal cortex and ventral striatum) also correlate with environmental valuations. We use contingent valuation (CV) as our behavioral tool for measuring valuations of environmental public goods. CV is a standard stated preference approach that presents survey respondents with information on an issue and asks questions that help policymakers determine how much citizens are willing to pay for a public good or policy. We scanned human subjects while they viewed environmental proposals, along with three other classes of goods. The presentation of all four classes of goods yielded robust and similar patterns of temporally synchronized brain activation within attentional networks. The activations associated with the traditional classes of goods replicate previous correlations between neural activity in valuation areas and behavioral preferences. In contrast, CV-elicited values for environmental proposals did not correlate with brain activity at either the individual or population level. For a sub-population of participants, CV-elicited values were correlated with activity within the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, a region associated with cognitive control and shifting decision strategies. The results show that neural activity associated with the subjective valuation of environmental proposals differs profoundly from the neural activity associated with previously examined goods and preference measures.
Science | 2017
Richard L. Revesz; Michael Greenstone; M. Hanemann; Michael A. Livermore; Thomas Sterner; D. Grab; Peter H. Howard; James H. Schwartz
In March, President Trumps Executive Order 13783 disbanded the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (IWG) ([ 1 ][1]). IWG developed estimates for federal agencies to use in cost-benefit analyses of climate policies. IWGs most recent central estimate was
Archive | 2014
Michael A. Livermore; Richard L. Revesz
50 in global
European journal of risk regulation | 2011
Michael A. Livermore
Since the publication of Revesz and Stavins (2007), there have been some significant normative advances in the area of environmental law and economics. For example, the emergence of climate change as the area of central concern for environmental regulation has brought a great deal of attention to the question of how to discount benefits that accrue into the far future and primarily affect individuals not yet born. Also, the rise of behavioral law and economics has created a shift away from exclusive reliance on neoclassical models.But the most significant changes have been on the positive side. In particular, the traditional alignment of interest groups has come close to experiencing an about-face. Conservative, anti-regulatory groups traditionally favored cost-benefit analysis, market-based instruments, and decentralization. Progressive, pro-regulatory groups traditionally opposed these approaches. In recent years, however, the tables have often been turned. These shifts suggest that commitment to principles is secondary to commitment to substantive regulatory outcomes, with groups of both sides of the spectrum availing themselves of whatever argument will better promote their preferences concerning the stringency of regulation.
Artificial Intelligence and Law | 2018
Greg Leibon; Michael A. Livermore; Reed Harder; Allen Riddell; Daniel N. Rockmore
On Tuesday, January 18, 2011 President Obama issued a new executive order and two somewhat related memoranda which embody some of the principles discussed by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Administrator Cass Sunstein in this Journal. Building on three decades worth of practice in the United States with regulatory review, the new order and memoranda maintain significant continuity with past experience, while emphasizing both “humanizing” and rationalizing elements in the practice of regulatory impact analysis.
Journal of Benefit-cost Analysis | 2013
J. Scott Holladay; Michael A. Livermore
Legal reasoning requires identification through search of authoritative legal texts (such as statutes, constitutions, or prior judicial opinions) that apply to a given legal question. In this paper, using a network representation of US Supreme Court opinions that integrates citation connectivity and topical similarity, we model the activity of law search as an organizing principle in the evolution of the corpus of legal texts. The network model and (parametrized) probabilistic search behavior generates a Pagerank-style ranking of the texts that in turn gives rise to a natural geometry of the opinion corpus. This enables us to then measure the ways in which new judicial opinions affect the topography of the network and its future evolution. While we deploy it here on the US Supreme Court opinion corpus, there are obvious extensions to large evolving bodies of legal text (or text corpora in general). The model is a proxy for the way in which new opinions influence the search behavior of litigants and judges and thus affect the law. This type of “legal search effect” is a new legal consequence of research practice that has not been previously identified in jurisprudential thought and has never before been subject to empirical analysis. We quantitatively estimate the extent of this effect and find significant relationships between search-related network structures and propensity of future citation. This finding indicates that “search influence” is a pathway through which judicial opinions can affect future legal development.
Nature | 2014
Richard L. Revesz; Peter H. Howard; Kenneth J. Arrow; Lawrence H. Goulder; Robert E. Kopp; Michael A. Livermore; Michael Oppenheimer; Thomas Sterner
Abstract We develop a model of international agreements to price a transboundry externality and provide a new heuristic to aid in interpreting negotiation behavior. Under conservative assumptions, a country’s net benefits will be positive under an efficient pollution price if its share of global damages is less than half its share of worldwide abatement costs. We solve for a permit allocation scheme consistent with that heuristic such that every region will have positive net benefits in an agreement to price the pollution externality at the globally efficient level. We then apply this framework to climate change using regional data from Integrated Assessment Models and test the feasibility of a global climate change treaty. The results indicate that several regions have positive net benefits from a globally efficient price on carbon, including Western Europe, South Asia (including India), and Latin America. We then solve for a permit allocation scheme that should produce worldwide agreement on a climate treaty. Using the same model, we show that differential carbon taxes aimed at producing universal agreement would produce tax rate differences of an order of magnitude. We also argue that shares of global GDP might be an appropriate proxy for exposure to climate damages and find that a global climate treaty would be cost-benefit justified for all countries without transfers when that assumption is used.
Archive | 2008
Richard L. Revesz; Michael A. Livermore
Archive | 2006
Michael A. Livermore
Duke Law Journal | 2013
Harry T. Edwards; Michael A. Livermore