0:00:00.500,0:00:05.000
The global economic financial crisis has reignited public interest

0:00:05.000,0:00:08.416
in something that's actually one of the oldest questions in economics,

0:00:08.416,0:00:11.100
dating back to at least before Adam Smith.

0:00:11.100,0:00:16.584
And that is, why is it that countries with seemingly similar economies and institutions

0:00:16.584,0:00:19.833
can display radically different savings behavior?

0:00:19.833,0:00:24.367
Now, many brilliant economists have spent their entire lives working on this question,

0:00:24.367,0:00:27.784
and as a field we've made a tremendous amount of headway

0:00:27.784,0:00:30.217
and we understand a lot about this.

0:00:30.217,0:00:33.851
What I'm here to talk with you about today is an intriguing new hypothesis

0:00:33.851,0:00:37.883
and some surprisingly powerful new findings that I've been working on

0:00:37.883,0:00:42.589
about the link between the structure of the language you speak

0:00:42.604,0:00:47.000
and how you find yourself with the propensity to save.

0:00:47.000,0:00:50.067
Let me tell you a little bit about savings rates, a little bit about language,

0:00:50.067,0:00:52.417
and then I'll draw that connection.

0:00:52.417,0:00:56.984
Let's start by thinking about the member countries of the OECD,

0:00:56.984,0:01:00.285
or the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

0:01:00.285,0:01:04.184
OECD countries, by and large, you should think about these

0:01:04.184,0:01:06.822
as the richest, most industrialized countries in the world.

0:01:06.822,0:01:10.872
And by joining the OECD, they were affirming a common commitment

0:01:10.872,0:01:14.310
to democracy, open markets and free trade.

0:01:14.310,0:01:18.995
Despite all of these similarities, we see huge differences in savings behavior.

0:01:18.995,0:01:21.445
So all the way over on the left of this graph,

0:01:21.445,0:01:26.179
what you see is many OECD countries saving over a quarter of their GDP every year,

0:01:26.179,0:01:30.860
and some OECD countries saving over a third of their GDP per year.

0:01:30.860,0:01:35.628
Holding down the right flank of the OECD, all the way on the other side, is Greece.

0:01:35.628,0:01:39.044
And what you can see is that over the last 25 years,

0:01:39.044,0:01:42.944
Greece has barely managed to save more than 10 percent of their GDP.

0:01:42.944,0:01:49.818
It should be noted, of course, that the United States and the U.K. are the next in line.

0:01:49.818,0:01:52.396
Now that we see these huge differences in savings rates,

0:01:52.396,0:01:56.062
how is it possible that language might have something to do with these differences?

0:01:56.062,0:01:59.111
Let me tell you a little bit about how languages fundamentally differ.

0:01:59.111,0:02:04.678
Linguists and cognitive scientists have been exploring this question for many years now.

0:02:04.678,0:02:09.288
And then I'll draw the connection between these two behaviors.

0:02:09.288,0:02:11.896
Many of you have probably already noticed that I'm Chinese.

0:02:11.896,0:02:14.861
I grew up in the Midwest of the United States.

0:02:14.861,0:02:17.312
And something I realized quite early on

0:02:17.312,0:02:20.903
was that the Chinese language forced me to speak about and --

0:02:20.903,0:02:23.794
in fact, more fundamentally than that --

0:02:23.794,0:02:27.884
ever so slightly forced me to think about family in very different ways.

0:02:27.884,0:02:29.961
Now, how might that be? Let me give you an example.

0:02:29.961,0:02:34.363
Suppose I were talking with you and I was introducing you to my uncle.

0:02:34.363,0:02:37.229
You understood exactly what I just said in English.

0:02:37.229,0:02:40.179
If we were speaking Mandarin Chinese with each other, though,

0:02:40.179,0:02:42.245
I wouldn't have that luxury.

0:02:42.245,0:02:45.078
I wouldn't have been able to convey so little information.

0:02:45.078,0:02:47.462
What my language would have forced me to do,

0:02:47.462,0:02:49.462
instead of just telling you, "This is my uncle,"

0:02:49.462,0:02:52.744
is to tell you a tremendous amount of additional information.

0:02:52.744,0:02:54.563
My language would force me to tell you

0:02:54.563,0:02:57.979
whether or not this was an uncle on my mother's side or my father's side,

0:02:57.979,0:03:01.063
whether this was an uncle by marriage or by birth,

0:03:01.063,0:03:03.295
and if this man was my father's brother,

0:03:03.295,0:03:06.079
whether he was older than or younger than my father.

0:03:06.079,0:03:10.212
All of this information is obligatory. Chinese doesn't let me ignore it.

0:03:10.212,0:03:12.378
And in fact, if I want to speak correctly,

0:03:12.378,0:03:15.495
Chinese forces me to constantly think about it.

0:03:15.495,0:03:19.444
Now, that fascinated me endlessly as a child,

0:03:19.444,0:03:22.679
but what fascinates me even more today as an economist

0:03:22.679,0:03:27.980
is that some of these same differences carry through to how languages speak about time.

0:03:27.980,0:03:32.229
So for example, if I'm speaking in English, I have to speak grammatically differently

0:03:32.229,0:03:34.962
if I'm talking about past rain, "It rained yesterday,"

0:03:34.962,0:03:37.194
current rain, "It is raining now,"

0:03:37.194,0:03:39.628
or future rain, "It will rain tomorrow."

0:03:39.628,0:03:44.455
Notice that English requires a lot more information with respect to the timing of events.

0:03:44.455,0:03:46.462
Why? Because I have to consider that

0:03:46.462,0:03:51.245
and I have to modify what I'm saying to say, "It will rain," or "It's going to rain."

0:03:51.245,0:03:55.361
It's simply not permissible in English to say, "It rain tomorrow."

0:03:55.361,0:03:59.545
In contrast to that, that's almost exactly what you would say in Chinese.

0:03:59.545,0:04:01.861
A Chinese speaker can basically say something

0:04:01.861,0:04:04.445
that sounds very strange to an English speaker's ears.

0:04:04.445,0:04:09.012
They can say, "Yesterday it rain," "Now it rain," "Tomorrow it rain."

0:04:09.012,0:04:12.875
In some deep sense, Chinese doesn't divide up the time spectrum

0:04:12.875,0:04:19.308
in the same way that English forces us to constantly do in order to speak correctly.

0:04:19.308,0:04:20.892
Is this difference in languages

0:04:20.892,0:04:25.087
only between very, very distantly related languages, like English and Chinese?

0:04:25.087,0:04:26.045
Actually, no.

0:04:26.045,0:04:29.778
So many of you know, in this room, that English is a Germanic language.

0:04:29.778,0:04:33.693
What you may not have realized is that English is actually an outlier.

0:04:33.693,0:04:36.943
It is the only Germanic language that requires this.

0:04:36.943,0:04:39.827
For example, most other Germanic language speakers

0:04:39.827,0:04:42.844
feel completely comfortable talking about rain tomorrow

0:04:42.844,0:04:44.810
by saying, "Morgen regnet es,"

0:04:44.810,0:04:48.710
quite literally to an English ear, "It rain tomorrow."

0:04:48.710,0:04:53.777
This led me, as a behavioral economist, to an intriguing hypothesis.

0:04:53.777,0:04:58.026
Could how you speak about time, could how your language forces you to think about time,

0:04:58.026,0:05:01.777
affect your propensity to behave across time?

0:05:01.777,0:05:04.677
You speak English, a futured language.

0:05:04.677,0:05:07.844
And what that means is that every time you discuss the future,

0:05:07.844,0:05:09.411
or any kind of a future event,

0:05:09.411,0:05:12.810
grammatically you're forced to cleave that from the present

0:05:12.810,0:05:15.443
and treat it as if it's something viscerally different.

0:05:15.443,0:05:17.943
Now suppose that that visceral difference

0:05:17.943,0:05:22.143
makes you subtly dissociate the future from the present every time you speak.

0:05:22.143,0:05:24.056
If that's true and it makes the future feel

0:05:24.056,0:05:27.039
like something more distant and more different from the present,

0:05:27.039,0:05:29.693
that's going to make it harder to save.

0:05:29.693,0:05:32.244
If, on the other hand, you speak a futureless language,

0:05:32.244,0:05:35.627
the present and the future, you speak about them identically.

0:05:35.627,0:05:38.610
If that subtly nudges you to feel about them identically,

0:05:38.610,0:05:40.994
that's going to make it easier to save.

0:05:40.994,0:05:43.544
Now this is a fanciful theory.

0:05:43.544,0:05:46.444
I'm a professor, I get paid to have fanciful theories.

0:05:46.444,0:05:50.678
But how would you actually go about testing such a theory?

0:05:50.678,0:05:54.744
Well, what I did with that was to access the linguistics literature.

0:05:54.744,0:05:59.127
And interestingly enough, there are pockets of futureless language speakers

0:05:59.127,0:06:01.060
situated all over the world.

0:06:01.060,0:06:04.426
This is a pocket of futureless language speakers in Northern Europe.

0:06:04.426,0:06:07.327
Interestingly enough, when you start to crank the data,

0:06:07.327,0:06:10.560
these pockets of futureless language speakers all around the world

0:06:10.560,0:06:14.494
turn out to be, by and large, some of the world's best savers.

0:06:14.494,0:06:16.660
Just to give you a hint of that,

0:06:16.660,0:06:19.410
let's look back at that OECD graph that we were talking about.

0:06:19.410,0:06:22.794
What you see is that these bars are systematically taller

0:06:22.794,0:06:24.926
and systematically shifted to the left

0:06:24.926,0:06:29.444
compared to these bars which are the members of the OECD that speak futured languages.

0:06:29.444,0:06:30.907
What is the average difference here?

0:06:30.907,0:06:34.193
Five percentage points of your GDP saved per year.

0:06:34.193,0:06:38.927
Over 25 years that has huge long-run effects on the wealth of your nation.

0:06:38.927,0:06:41.627
Now while these findings are suggestive,

0:06:41.627,0:06:43.693
countries can be different in so many different ways

0:06:43.693,0:06:48.077
that it's very, very difficult sometimes to account for all of these possible differences.

0:06:48.077,0:06:52.109
What I'm going to show you, though, is something that I've been engaging in for a year,

0:06:52.109,0:06:54.432
which is trying to gather all of the largest datasets

0:06:54.432,0:06:56.724
that we have access to as economists,

0:06:56.724,0:07:00.106
and I'm going to try and strip away all of those possible differences,

0:07:00.106,0:07:02.760
hoping to get this relationship to break.

0:07:02.760,0:07:07.791
And just in summary, no matter how far I push this, I can't get it to break.

0:07:07.791,0:07:09.556
Let me show you how far you can do that.

0:07:09.556,0:07:14.189
One way to imagine that is I gather large datasets from around the world.

0:07:14.189,0:07:17.923
So for example, there is the Survey of Health, [Aging] and Retirement in Europe.

0:07:17.923,0:07:21.757
From this dataset you actually learn that retired European families

0:07:21.757,0:07:24.390
are extremely patient with survey takers.

0:07:24.390,0:07:26.306
(Laughter)

0:07:26.306,0:07:30.690
So imagine that you're a retired household in Belgium and someone comes to your front door.

0:07:30.690,0:07:35.274
"Excuse me, would you mind if I peruse your stock portfolio?

0:07:35.274,0:07:38.806
Do you happen to know how much your house is worth? Do you mind telling me?

0:07:38.806,0:07:42.073
Would you happen to have a hallway that's more than 10 meters long?

0:07:42.073,0:07:46.574
If you do, would you mind if I timed how long it took you to walk down that hallway?

0:07:46.574,0:07:50.471
Would you mind squeezing as hard as you can, in your dominant hand, this device

0:07:50.471,0:07:51.983
so I can measure your grip strength?

0:07:51.983,0:07:56.006
How about blowing into this tube so I can measure your lung capacity?"

0:07:56.006,0:07:58.890
The survey takes over a day.

0:07:58.890,0:08:00.373
(Laughter)

0:08:00.373,0:08:04.273
Combine that with a Demographic and Health Survey

0:08:04.273,0:08:08.723
collected by USAID in developing countries in Africa, for example,

0:08:08.723,0:08:13.874
which that survey actually can go so far as to directly measure the HIV status

0:08:13.874,0:08:16.973
of families living in, for example, rural Nigeria.

0:08:16.973,0:08:18.874
Combine that with a world value survey,

0:08:18.874,0:08:23.307
which measures the political opinions and, fortunately for me, the savings behaviors

0:08:23.307,0:08:28.006
of millions of families in hundreds of countries around the world.

0:08:28.006,0:08:31.824
Take all of that data, combine it, and this map is what you get.

0:08:31.824,0:08:34.074
What you find is nine countries around the world

0:08:34.074,0:08:36.726
that have significant native populations

0:08:36.726,0:08:40.773
which speak both futureless and futured languages.

0:08:40.773,0:08:44.307
And what I'm going to do is form statistical matched pairs

0:08:44.307,0:08:49.900
between families that are nearly identical on every dimension that I can measure,

0:08:49.900,0:08:53.437
and then I'm going to explore whether or not the link between language and savings holds

0:08:53.437,0:08:56.920
even after controlling for all of these levels.

0:08:56.920,0:08:59.137
What are the characteristics we can control for?

0:08:59.137,0:09:01.901
Well I'm going to match families on country of birth and residence,

0:09:01.901,0:09:04.303
the demographics -- what sex, their age --

0:09:04.303,0:09:06.437
their income level within their own country,

0:09:06.437,0:09:09.452
their educational achievement, a lot about their family structure.

0:09:09.452,0:09:12.970
It turns out there are six different ways to be married in Europe.

0:09:12.970,0:09:17.170
And most granularly, I break them down by religion

0:09:17.170,0:09:20.485
where there are 72 categories of religions in the world --

0:09:20.485,0:09:22.202
so an extreme level of granularity.

0:09:22.202,0:09:26.735
There are 1.4 billion different ways that a family can find itself.

0:09:26.735,0:09:30.784
Now effectively everything I'm going to tell you from now on

0:09:30.784,0:09:33.834
is only comparing these basically nearly identical families.

0:09:33.834,0:09:36.334
It's getting as close as possible to the thought experiment

0:09:36.334,0:09:39.267
of finding two families both of whom live in Brussels

0:09:39.267,0:09:42.267
who are identical on every single one of these dimensions,

0:09:42.267,0:09:45.383
but one of whom speaks Flemish and one of whom speaks French;

0:09:45.383,0:09:48.100
or two families that live in a rural district in Nigeria,

0:09:48.100,0:09:51.933
one of whom speaks Hausa and one of whom speaks Igbo.

0:09:51.933,0:09:55.817
Now even after all of this granular level of control,

0:09:55.817,0:09:58.983
do futureless language speakers seem to save more?

0:09:58.983,0:10:02.636
Yes, futureless language speakers, even after this level of control,

0:10:02.636,0:10:06.334
are 30 percent more likely to report having saved in any given year.

0:10:06.334,0:10:08.150
Does this have cumulative effects?

0:10:08.150,0:10:12.570
Yes, by the time they retire, futureless language speakers, holding constant their income,

0:10:12.570,0:10:15.638
are going to retire with 25 percent more in savings.

0:10:15.638,0:10:18.119
Can we push this data even further?

0:10:18.119,0:10:23.418
Yes, because I just told you, we actually collect a lot of health data as economists.

0:10:23.418,0:10:27.301
Now how can we think about health behaviors to think about savings?

0:10:27.301,0:10:30.134
Well, think about smoking, for example.

0:10:30.134,0:10:33.317
Smoking is in some deep sense negative savings.

0:10:33.317,0:10:36.983
If savings is current pain in exchange for future pleasure,

0:10:36.983,0:10:38.291
smoking is just the opposite.

0:10:38.291,0:10:41.150
It's current pleasure in exchange for future pain.

0:10:41.150,0:10:44.100
What we should expect then is the opposite effect.

0:10:44.100,0:10:45.868
And that's exactly what we find.

0:10:45.868,0:10:49.635
Futureless language speakers are 20 to 24 percent less likely

0:10:49.635,0:10:53.050
to be smoking at any given point in time compared to identical families,

0:10:53.050,0:10:55.951
and they're going to be 13 to 17 percent less likely

0:10:55.951,0:10:58.168
to be obese by the time they retire,

0:10:58.168,0:11:00.631
and they're going to report being 21 percent more likely

0:11:00.631,0:11:02.918
to have used a condom in their last sexual encounter.

0:11:02.918,0:11:06.401
I could go on and on with the list of differences that you can find.

0:11:06.401,0:11:10.201
It's almost impossible not to find a savings behavior

0:11:10.201,0:11:12.800
for which this strong effect isn't present.

0:11:12.800,0:11:17.550
My linguistics and economics colleagues at Yale and I are just starting to do this work

0:11:17.550,0:11:22.717
and really explore and understand the ways that these subtle nudges

0:11:22.717,0:11:28.112
cause us to think more or less about the future every single time we speak.

0:11:28.112,0:11:30.413
Ultimately, the goal,

0:11:30.413,0:11:34.612
once we understand how these subtle effects can change our decision making,

0:11:34.612,0:11:37.562
we want to be able to provide people tools

0:11:37.562,0:11:40.370
so that they can consciously make themselves better savers

0:11:40.370,0:11:43.629
and more conscious investors in their own future.

0:11:43.629,0:11:45.896
Thank you very much.

0:11:45.896,0:11:52.264
(Applause)