This paper explores the large gap between the microeconometric estimates of the Frisch labor supply elasticity (0–.5) and the values used by macroeconomists to calibrate general equilibrium models (2–4). These two ranges identify two fundamentally different notions, the micro and macro Frisch elasticity, respectively. Due to the different definitions, there are two restrictions in the micro Frisch elasticity that are relaxed in the macro Frisch elasticity. First, the micro Frisch elasticity focuses only on prime‐aged married males who are the head of their household, while the macro Frisch elasticity represents the whole population. Second, the micro Frisch elasticity only incorporates intensive margin fluctuations in hours, while the macro Frisch elasticity includes both intensive and extensive margin fluctuations. This paper finds that relaxing these two restrictions causes estimates of the Frisch elasticity to increase from 0.2 to between 2.9 and 3.1, indicating that these two restrictions can explain the gap between the microeconometric estimates and the calibration values. However, this paper demonstrates that these estimates of the macro Frisch elasticity are sensitive to the estimation procedure and also the exclusion of older individuals, implying that calibration values used for macroeconomic models should be selected carefully. (JEL E24, J22)

No abstract

Interdisciplinary partnerships foster innovation to address pressing social problems. This paper describes an interdisciplinary partnership called the Chicago Food System Collaborative (CFSC) composed of a team of partners from four academic institutions and three community-based organizations representing a total of eight disciplines that included: community development and community organizing, community psychology, geography, nursing, nutrition, public health, sociology, and urban planning and policy. Partners came together to address the issue of access to healthy foods and nutrition in a working class African American neighborhood. We analyze and discuss the core principles that guided the partnership and its impact across three dimensions: understanding through interdisciplinary action research, building capacity, and facilitating innovations in practices and policies. Despite the challenges of interdisciplinary partnerships, the potential benefits and impact of such efforts reflect their value as a comprehensive approach to addressing complex social problems.