An interdisciplinary analysis of obesity: theory and empirical evidence

The dissertation is structured in three parts. The first part compares US and EU agricultural policies since the end of WWII. There is not enough evidence for claiming that agricultural support has a negative impact on obesity trends. I discuss the possibility of an exchange in best practices to fight obesity. There are relevant economic, societal and legal differences between the US and the EU. However, partnerships against obesity are welcomed. The second part presents a socio-ecological model of the determinants of obesity. I employ an interdisciplinary model because it captures the simultaneous influence of several variables. Obesity is an interaction of pre-birth, primary and secondary socialization factors. To test the significance of each factor, I use data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health. I compare the average body mass index across different populations. Differences in means are statistically significant. In the last part I use the National Survey of Children Health. I analyze the effect that family characteristics, built environment, cultural norms and individual factors have on the body mass index (BMI). I use Ordered Probit models and I calculate the marginal effects. I use State and ethnicity fixed effects to control for unobserved heterogeneity. I find that southern US States tend have on average a higher probability of being obese. On the ethnicity side, White Americans have a lower BMI respect to Black Americans, Hispanics and American Indians Native Islanders; being Asian is associated with a lower probability of being obese. In neighborhoods where trust level and safety perception are higher, children are less overweight and obese. Similar results are shown for higher level of parental income and education. Breastfeeding has a negative impact. Higher values of measures of behavioral disorders have a positive and significant impact on obesity, as predicted by the theory.

A Law and Economics Analysis of Lobbying Regulation Towards an optimal structure through the Cost Indicator Index

This research primarily represents a contribution to the lobbying regulation research arena. It introduces an index which for the first time attempts to measure the direct compliance costs of lobbying regulation. The Cost Indicator Index (CII) offers a brand new platform for qualitative and quantitative assessment of adopted lobbying laws and proposals of those laws, both in the comparative and the sui generis dimension. The CII is not just the only new tool introduced in the last decade, but it is the only tool available for comparative assessments of the costs of lobbying regulations. Beside the qualitative contribution, the research introduces an additional theoretical framework for complementary qualitative analysis of the lobbying laws. The Ninefold theory allows a more structured assessment and classification of lobbying regulations, both by indication of benefits and costs. Lastly, this research introduces the Cost-Benefit Labels (CBL). These labels might improve an ex-ante lobbying regulation impact assessment procedure, primarily in the sui generis perspective. In its final part, the research focuses on four South East European countries (Slovenia, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia), and for the first time brings them into the discussion and calculates their CPI and CII scores. The special focus of the application was on Serbia, whose proposal on the Law on Lobbying has been extensively analysed in qualitative and quantitative terms, taking into consideration specific political and economic circumstances of the country. Although the obtained results are of an indicative nature, the CII will probably find its place within the academic and policymaking arena, and will hopefully contribute to a better understanding of lobbying regulations worldwide.