Abstract: We examine the impact of abortion restrictions on the geographic mobility of college-educated skilled women. Exploiting the staggered adoption of Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws across US states that restrict women's access to abortion, we find that skilled women who relocate exhibit a greater propensity to move to states without TRAP laws (non-TRAP states) than they did prior to the TRAP law adoption. This pattern is stronger among women in more liberal and less religious areas than among women in more conservative and more religious areas. These findings are consistent with the view that relocation decisions are often driven by the alignment between personal values and the local policy environment. We use the audit industry as a specific setting to address the implications for employer performance. We find that TRAP law adoption increases female auditor turnover at local offices relative to same-firm offices in non-TRAP states, and the resulting loss of human capital lowers audit quality.

Abstract: This monograph offers an overview of auditing practices in China from the perspective of New Institutional Economics. We follow Douglass North’s institutional/cognitive approach to understand auditing as an institution, and our discussion proceeds in four steps. First, we explore the economic and regulatory forces that have driven the evolution of the audit market in China. Second, we discuss the implications of audit market consolidation on audit outcomes. Third, we delve into the role of audit partners and elaborate on how auditor experiences influence auditor judgment, thereby shaping the effectiveness of the auditing institution. Finally, we discuss opportunities for integrating the stakeholder model, new structural economics, informal institutions, and cognitive science into future auditing research.

Abstract: The U.S. Department of Justice’s Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) incentivizes firms to voluntarily disclose misconduct in exchange for reduced penalties. I examine how this policy reshapes supplier contracting with high-risk non-detected firms—firms with observable red flags of misconduct yet without publicly recorded violations. I argue that by inducing firms with hidden misconduct to self-report, the policy reduces the share of hidden violators in the non-detected pool, making non-detection a more credible signal of compliance. Consistent with this mechanism, I find that high-risk non-detected firms are more likely to form new supplier contracts after the policy, with the effect concentrated in first-time partnerships. The effect is stronger when suppliers face greater uncertainty about customer compliance, are more vulnerable to customer misconduct, and operate in settings where the self-reporting incentives are most credible. Overall, the findings suggest that self-reporting policy can mitigate counterparty’s uncertainty about hidden misconduct and expand feasible matches in supply chain relationships.

Abstract: The audit labor market presents a puzzle: accounting enrollment is declining and entry wages adjust little, even as firms post more junior-auditor positions. We develop amodel of higher-order uncertainty in which prospective auditors respond both to AI’s augmentation and automation effects and to their expectations of peers’ responses. When higher-order alignment about augmentation sufficiently lags that about automation, entry falls below the full-common-knowledge benchmark. Incomplete higher-order alignment among firms causes wages to adjust by less than the full-information amount, leaving additional unfilled positions manifested in active postings. We test this mechanism using AI-faculty departures as shocks to the local formation of shared augmentation beliefs. A stacked difference-in-differences design shows that these departures reduce student entry into auditing, increase junior-auditor postings, produce limited wage adjustment, and lower audit quality over longer horizons. Universities therefore sustain professional pipelines not only by producing skills, but also by coordinating expectations about their future value.

Abstract: While theory suggests that firms should remain silent on divisive sociopolitical issues due to uncertain investor reactions (Bond and Zeng 2022), we document that nearly 30% of S&P 1500 firms publicly express support for the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement on Twitter. This disclosure is positively associated with proxies for the management team’s liberal ideology. We provide evidence of ideologically driven investor responses to BLM disclosures: liberal-leaning mutual and hedge fund managers exhibit abnormal purchases of BLM-supporting firms, whereas conservative-leaning managers exhibit abnormal sales. Similarly, liberal-leaning depositors increase their holdings of riskless insured deposits at BLM-supporting banks, while conservative-leaning depositors reduce theirs. These shifts occur despite minimal changes in risk or return, highlighting the role of ideological alignment in investment decisions. Our findings imply that managers derive ideological utility from value-consistent disclosure and are willing to bear the cost of investor polarization.