This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The Last Word on the Wage Curve?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Peter Nijkamp () (Dept. of Spatial Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam)
Jacques Poot () (School of Economics and Finance, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In the last decade we have seen extensive international research on the extent to which wages of individuals respond to changing local labour market conditions. For many countries and periods, an inverse relationship between wages and unemployment rates has been found. Following Blanchflower and Oswald (1990), this relationship is referred to as the wage curve. The elasticity of this wage curve has been reported to be so similar across studies, at a level of about -0.1, that Card (1995) called it an "empirical law of economics". However, there is considerable heterogeneity among wage curve studies. This paper carries out modern meta-analytic techniques on a sample of 208 elasticities derived from the literature to uncover the reasons for the differences in empirical results across studies. It is found that the wage curve is a robust empirical phenomenon, but there is also clear evidence of downward publication bias. In addition, many reported t statistics are biased upwards due to the use of aggregate unemployment rates and other labour market characteristics for groups. A maximum likelihood method and a trimming procedure are used to correct for these biases. Both methods give similar results for our sample. An unbiased estimate of the wage curve elasticity is about -0.07.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/02029.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 02-029/3.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 21 Mar 2002
Date of revision: 13 Mar 2003
Handle: RePEc:dgr:uvatin:20020029

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Walther Schoonenberg).

Related research
Keywords: C12; C13; J31; R23;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-3.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.