Are Agricultural Experiment Station Faculty Salaries Competitively Or Monopsonistically Determined?
AbstractWe examine the determinants of agricultural experiment station faculty salaries and find that productivity pays-as manifest by grantsmanship, publications, and the elicitation of competing offers-with no residual evidence of a negative seniority-salary relationship that could signal university monopsony power. This contrasts with findings in the previous literature on faculty salaries. Moreover, national market salary benchmarks, which may proxy for imperfectly observable productivity, correlate almost one-for-one with individual faculty salaries, with individual deviations from peers' salaries proving essentially random. This evidence is much more consistent with the hypothesis that experiment station faculty salaries are determined in a competitive labor market than with the prevailing wisdom that they are set monopsonistically.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association in its journal Agricultural and Resource Economics Review.
Volume (Year): 28 (1999)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
Other versions of this item:
- Barrett, Christopher B. & Bailey, DeeVon, 1998. "Are Agricultural Experiment Station Faculty Salaries Competitively Or Monopsonistically Determined?," Economics Research Institute, ERI Study Papers 28370, Utah State University, Economics Department.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ransom, Michael R, 1993. "Seniority and Monopsony in the Academic Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 221-33, March.
- Lazear, Edward P & Rosen, Sherwin, 1981.
"Rank-Order Tournaments as Optimum Labor Contracts,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 841-64, October.
- Bhattacharya, Sudipto & Guasch, J Luis, 1988. "Heterogeneity, Tournaments, and Hierarchies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 867-81, August.
- J. A. Hausman, 1976.
"Specification Tests in Econometrics,"
185, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Hallock, Kevin F, 1995. "Seniority and Monopsony in the Academic Labor Market: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 654-57, June.
- Harris, Milton & Holstrom, Bengt, 1982.
"A Theory of Wage Dynamics,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 315-33, July.
- Hoffman, Emily P, 1976. "Faculty Salaries: Is There Discrimination by Sex, Race, and Discipline? Additional Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(1), pages 196-98, March.
- William M. Boal & Michael R. Ransom, 1997. "Monopsony in the Labor Market," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 86-112, March.
- Gordon, Nancy M & Morton, Thomas E & Braden, Ina C, 1974. "Faculty Salaries: Is There Discrimination by Sex, Race, and Discipline?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(3), pages 419-27, June.
- Barbezat, Debra A. & Donihue, Michael R., 1998. "Do faculty salaries rise with job seniority?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 239-244, February.
- Srivastava, Lorie & Thilmany, Dawn D., 2000. "Agricultural Economists' Performance And Pay: An Analysis Of Land Grant University Salaries," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36511, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
- Hilmer, Christiana E. & Hilmer, Michael J., 2004. "On The Return To Journal Quality, Coauthorship And Author Order Within Top Ranked Agricultural Economics Programs," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20179, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.