Guy Lacroix

Mr. Guy Lacroix

Economic, Université Laval, Québec, Canada

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

30Years (1997-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2019 in European Economic Review
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JBJulie Beugnot
Julie Beugnot
BFBernard Fortin
Bernard Fortin
Guy LacroixGuy Lacroix
Guy Lacroix
MVMarie Claire Villeval
Marie Claire Villeval

22 September 2009 in Journal of Population Economics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Guy LacroixGuy Lacroix
Guy Lacroix
NRNatalia Radtchenko
Natalia Radtchenko

25 January 2017 in Review of Economics of the Household
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ADAnyck Dauphin
Anyck Dauphin
BFBernard Fortin
Bernard Fortin
Guy LacroixGuy Lacroix
Guy Lacroix

21 September 2017 in Journal of Perinatology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MBM Beltempo
M Beltempo
Guy LacroixGuy Lacroix
Guy Lacroix
MCM Cabot
M Cabot
RBR Blais
R Blais
BPB Piedboeuf
B Piedboeuf


1 December 2013 in Canadian Public Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NCNicholas-James Clavet
Nicholas-James Clavet
JDJean-Yves Duclos
Jean-Yves Duclos
Guy LacroixGuy Lacroix
Guy Lacroix
This paper analyzes the impact of a recent recommendation made by Quebec’s Comité consultatif de lutte contre la pauvreté et l’exclusion sociale to guarantee every individual an income equal to 80 percent of Statistics Canada’s Market Basket Measure (MBM). Workers with earnings at least equivalent to 16 hours at the minimum wage would be entitled to 100 percent of the MBM. We also investigate the impact of three alternative proposals: (a) a change in the above hours cut-off from 16 to 30 hours; (b) a guaranteed income equal to 100 percent of the MBM, irrespective of earnings; and (c) a $3/hour conditional wage subsidy. To do this, we first estimate a structural labour supply model using the existing tax code and predict the labour supply of a representative sample of individuals based upon the parameter estimates of the model. Simulations show that the original recommendation would have strong negative impacts on participation rates of low earners and that its cost would exceed $2 billion. Increasing the hours cut-off is predicted to have little impact beyond that of the original recommendation. Providing a guaranteed income equivalent to 100 percent of the MBM, on the other hand, would have a large impact. We find that contrary to what is usually assumed, guaranteed income schemes may increase the incidence of low income rather than decrease it.