Working Paper: NBER ID: w31313
Authors: Alberto Galasso; Hong Luo; Brooklynn Zhu
Abstract: Are laboratory safety practices a tax on scientific productivity? We examine this question by exploiting the substantial increase in safety regulations at the University of California following the shocking death of a research assistant in 2008. Difference-in-differences analyses show that relative to “dry labs” that use theoretical and computational methods, the publication rates of “wet labs” that conduct experiments using chemical and biological substances did not change significantly after the shock. At the same time, we find that wet labs that used dangerous compounds more frequently before the shock reduced their reliance on flammable materials and unfamiliar hazardous compounds afterward, even though their overall research agenda does not appear to be affected. Our findings suggest that laboratory safety may shape the production of science, but they do not support the claim that safety practices impose a significant tax on research productivity.
Keywords: Economics of Science; Risk Perception; Safety Regulation
JEL Codes: I19; I24; O31
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| Increased safety regulations (R48) | Research productivity (O47) |
| Increased safety regulations (R48) | Reliance on flammable materials (L94) |
| Reliance on flammable materials (L94) | Research productivity (O47) |