Welcome to my page! I am an applied economist by background and currently work as a Postdoctoral Economist at the Institute for the Future of Work (IFOW) in London. I hold a PhD in Economics from the University of Sheffield and two MSc degrees in Economic Development and Growth.
My research focuses on inequality, labour markets and the future of work. I am particularly interested in measuring and understanding inequality and in the different ways new technologies are affecting people and changing the world of work. At IFOW, I lead a work package of the Pissarides Review: The Future of Work and Well-being, a large research project led by Nobel laureate PI Professor Sir Christopher Pissarides.
I am also a Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics, a Visiting Researcher at the Department of Economics (University of Sheffield) and an Honorary Research Associate at the Department of Mathematics at Imperial College London.
PhD in Economics, 2021
The University of Sheffield (UK)
MSc in Economic Development and Growth, 2016
Lund University (Sweden)
MSc in Economic Development and Growth, 2015
The University of Warwick (UK)
BSc in Economics, 2014
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil)
Using a new dataset combining the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) and Understanding Society (UKHLS), this paper examines the current state of intergenerational income mobility in the UK. This extends previous evidence in several directions, with a focus on younger cohorts of individuals born between 1973 and 1992. I find evidence of considerable intergenerational persistence in the transmission of resources at the household level with an intergenerational elasticity of 0.26 and a rank coefficient of 0.30. This picture of mobility remains at the individual level and under a range of robustness tests that address traditional methodological concerns. While mobility is relatively low at the national level, I find meaningful differences in income mobility rates across the country. More generally, regions with lower income in the North of England display substantially lower levels of both relative and absolute income mobility than regions in the South.
Many studies emphasise the potential for widespread job displacement from exposure to AI. Fewer studies examine the actual impact on job creation as well as displacement, skills demand, and the quality of jobs. Since AI may have multiple positive and negative consequences, it is important to know what drives outcomes, and what factors moderate its impact. Drawing upon theories of technology adoption, we present an empirical study of factors influencing decision maker perceptions of AI, which we hypothesize mediate organization and environmental factors and adoption. We theorize two moderators for the impact of AI on net job creation, skills demand, and job quality. First, Regional Innovation Readiness reflects the availability of enabling resources in the local environment, in the form of an educated workforce and the connectivity infrastructure. Second, High Involvement HRM is an investment orientation which includes employees in the process of adoption. We test our hypotheses using primary data collected from 1012 organizations across all sectors of the UK economy. We find both Regional Innovation Readiness and High Involvement HRM play a significant role in influencing positive and negative outcomes from AI adoption. We discuss the significant implications for policymakers as well as managers.
Some theories suggest that ethnic minority students who anticipate discrimination in the labour market may invest more in easily observable human capital, such as education, to signal their productivity to employers. Empirical research has been hampered, however, by a lack of direct information on anticipated labour market treatment. We link ethnic minority student expectations of facing discrimination in the labour market to subsequent performance in high-stakes certificated national exams in England. Our findings suggest that anticipating labour market discrimination is associated with better exam performance, consistent with the view that students are seeking to counteract potential future penalties.