Bio
I am a Postdoctoral Scholar at the O’Donnell Center for Behavioral Economics at UC Berkeley. I will join the IIES as an Assistant Professor in 2026.
My research examines how governments can optimally provide assistance and social protection to help the most vulnerable meet their basic needs. I focus on the role of psychological factors, such as mental health and behavioural biases, in shaping behaviour and policy effectiveness.
I have a BA in Mathematics from the University of Cambridge and a PhD in Economics from the LSE. Before my PhD, I worked as an Economist at The Behaviouralist, a behavioural science research consultancy.
đź“„ CV
📧 canishknaik@gmail.com
Pronouns: he/him
Working Papers
January 2026
Abstract (click to expand)
: People living with mental disorders are vulnerable, yet often struggle to navigate complex barriers to accessing assistance. How this shapes the effectiveness of the social safety net remains unclear. Using administrative data covering the population of the Netherlands, I find that people with poor mental health are 3Ă— more likely to fall below the poverty line but only receive social assistance at similar rates to those with good mental health. Moreover, a policy that increases barriers disproportionately screens out people suffering from mental disorders. This is not because they value benefits less; individuals with poor mental health respond more to exogenous variation in the benefit level, suggesting a strong redistributive motive. To interpret these patterns, I develop a simple framework showing how take-up behaviour reveals whether the neediest are being screened out. Calibrating the model shows that those with mental disorders reveal a 57% higher marginal cost of overcoming barriers and a 2Ă— higher marginal value of benefits (need), controlling for income. Therefore, similar take-up rates mask poor targeting. In this context, reducing barriers is 2.3Ă— more cost-effective than increasing benefits.
(with
Daniel Reck)
October 2025
Abstract (click to expand)
: Inconsistent choice undermines the revealed preference foundations of traditional welfare economics, leading to controversy about policymaking in the presence of behavioral frictions. We model an optimal policy problem wherein a benevolent planner is uncertain which behavioral frame reveals normative preferences. We axiomatize welfarist criteria that are similar to social welfare functions, with intrapersonal frames replacing interpersonal types. Under paternalistic ambiguity aversion or paternalistic risk aversion, the planner values policies that are robust to normative uncertainty. We apply these welfarist criteria and robustness concepts in examples, including default options, manipulation of reference points, present focus, corrective taxation for internalities, and nudging.
A Welfare Analysis of Public Housing Allocation Mechanisms
(with
Neil Thakral)
November 2022 (Please email for draft)
Abstract (click to expand)
: When allocating scarce resources such as public housing units to applicants in a waiting list, welfare depends on applicants’ preferences (match values and waiting costs) as well as their choices (which may involve errors). To trade off between allowing agents to wait for better matches and prioritizing agents with high waiting costs, allocation mechanisms impose restrictions on choices. Public housing allocation mechanisms in the UK restrict the set of available options that an applicant may accept, while mechanisms in the US restrict the number of times an applicant may reject. We examine how these different ways of restricting choices influence welfare, both theoretically and empirically. Using data on preferences for public housing in the US and the UK, we show how welfare compares under rationality and explore the sensitivity of the mechanisms to choice-error.
Work in Progress
The Social Determinants of Mental Health
(with
Will Parker
, Johannes Spinnewijn)
Abstract (click to expand)
: This paper quantifies mental health inequality and explores the underlying mechanisms using administrative data covering the entire Dutch population. Individuals at the bottom of the income distribution use psychotropic medications 2 times more, are hospitalized for mental health conditions 2.5 times more, and die by suicide 4 times more than those at the top. Unequal healthcare access cannot explain this gradient, allowing us to focus on the decomposition into two key channels: social causation (poverty causing poor mental health) and social drift (poor mental health causing poverty). We find limited evidence for social causation except during adolescence. The gradient is instead primarily driven by social drift: mental health shocks impose substantial earnings penalties, with work status as the key mediator. These findings highlight the value of targeted mental disorder prevention for children of low-income parents and enhanced social insurance against the economic costs of mental illness.
Rebuilding Lives, not just Homes: Addressing Trauma in Disaster Recovery
(with
Amen Jalal
, Pol Simpson)
Abstract (click to expand)
: Disaster recovery often focuses on rebuilding physical infrastructure, overlooking the mental health impact of traumatic events like floods. In Pakistan, where flooding in 2022 submerged a third of the country and lasted up to 8 months, women exposed to a more intense flood shock were 11 pp more likely to have severe psychological distress 2 years later. Ignoring mental health in reconstruction may prolong the socio-economic impact of disasters by limiting individuals’ ability to work, plan, and recover. This project explores complementarities between mental health support and the standard infrastructure-focused approach by randomizing a trauma-based mental health intervention and leveraging natural variation in access to a housing reconstruction program in a 2x2 design. Our findings aim to measure the non-economic losses and damages of climate catastrophes, and inform more holistic disaster recovery policies that address both physical and psychological needs.
Teaching
LSE
School of Public Policy (Graduate)
Public Economics for Public Policy (2022 – 2024)
Teaching evaluations: 2022 (4.8/5)| 2023 (5/5)| 2024 (4.7/5)
Class Teacher Award: 2023, 2024 (highly commended)
Excellence in Education Award: 2022, 2023, 2024
Economics Department (Undergraduate)
First-year Micro- and Macroeconomics (2021 – 2023)
Teaching evaluations: 2021 (4.5/5)| 2022 (4.7/5)| 2023 (4.6/5)
Economics Department (Graduate)
Intro Probability and Statistics (Math Camp) (2022 – 2024)
No teaching evalutions
Theme: Minimal by orderedlist
