Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'regressing'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Authors
No authors occur more than twice in this search.
Viewing papers 11 through 20 of 21
-
Working PaperOutsourced R&D and GDP Growth
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-19
Endogenous growth theory holds that growth should increase with R&D. However coarse comparison between R&D and US GDP growth over the past forty years indicates that inflation scientific labor increased 2.5 times, while GDP growth was at best stagnant. The leading explanation for the disconnect between theory and the empirical record is that R&D has gotten harder. I develop and test an alternative view that firms have become worse at it. I find no evidence R&D has gotten harder. Instead I find firms' R&D productivity declined 65%, and that the main culprit in the decline is outsourced R&D, which is unproductive for the funding firm. This offers hope firms' R&D productivity and economic growth may be fairly easily restored by bringing outsourced R&D back in-house.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperRevisiting the Effects of Unemployment Insurance Extensions on Unemployment: A Measurement Error-Corrected Regression Discontinuity Approach
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
carra-2016-01
The extension of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits was a key policy response to the Great Recession. However, these benefit extensions may have had detrimental labor market effects. While evidence on the individual labor supply response indicates small effects on unemployment, recent work by Hagedorn et al. (2015) uses a county border pair identification strategy to find that the total effects inclusive of effects on labor demand are substantially larger. By focusing on variation within border county pairs, this identification strategy requires counties in the pairs to be similar in terms of unobservable factors. We explore this assumption using an alternative regression discontinuity approach that controls for changes in unobservables by distance to the border. To do so, we must account for measurement error induced by using county-level aggregates. These new results provide no evidence of a large change in unemployment induced by differences in UI generosity across state boundaries. Further analysis suggests that individuals respond to UI benefit differences across boundaries by targeting job search in high-benefit states, thereby raising concerns of treatment spillovers in this setting. Taken together, these two results suggest that the effect of UI benefit extensions on unemployment remains an open question.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperFirm Market Power and the Earnings Distribution
December 2011
Working Paper Number:
CES-11-41
Using the Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD) data from the United States Census Bureau, I compute firm-level measures of labor market (monopsony) power. To generate these measures, I extend the dynamic model proposed by Manning (2003) and estimate the labor supply elasticity facing each private non-farm firm in the US. While a link between monopsony power and earnings has traditionally been assumed, I provide the first direct evidence of the positive relationship between a firm\'s labor supply elasticity and the earnings of its workers. I also contrast the semistructural method with the more traditional use of concentration ratios to measure a firm\'s labor market power. In addition, I provide several alternative measures of labor market power which account for potential threats to identification such as endogenous mobility. Finally, I construct a counterfactual earnings distribution which allows the effects of firm market power to vary across the earnings distribution. I estimate the average firm\'s labor supply elasticity to be 1.08, however my findings suggest there to be significant variability in the distribution of firm market power across US firms, and that dynamic monopsony models are superior to the use of concentration ratios in evaluating a firm\'s labor market power. I find that a one-unit increase in the labor supply elasticity to the firm is associated with wage gains of between 5 and 18 percent. While nontrivial, these estimates imply that firms do not fully exercise their labor market power over their workers. Furthermore, I find that the negative earnings impact of a firm\'s market power is strongest in the lower half of the earnings distribution, and that a one standard deviation increase in firms\' labor supply elasticities reduces the variance of the earnings distribution by 9 percent.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Effects of Outsourcing on the Elasticity of Labor Demand
March 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-07
In this paper, I focus on the effects of outsourcing on conditional labor demand elasticities. I begin by developing a model of outsourcing that formalizes this relationship. I show that the increased possibility of outsourcing (modeled as a decline in foreign intermediate input prices and an increase in the elasticity of substitution between foreign and domestic intermediate inputs) should increase labor demand elasticities. I also show that, a decline in the share of unskilled labor, due either to skill biased technological change or to movement of unskilled labor intensive stages abroad, can work in the opposite direction and reverse the increasing trend in elasticities. I then test the predictions of the model using the U.S. Census Bureau's Longitudinal Research Database (LRD). The instrumental variable approach used in the estimation of labor demand equations is the main methodological contribution of this paper. I directly address the endogeneity of wages in the labor demand equation by using average nonmanufacturing wages for each location and year as an instrumental variable for the plant-level wages in the manufacturing sector. The results support the main predictions of my model. U.S. manufacturing plants operating in industries that heavily outsource experienced an increase in their conditional labor demand elasticities during the 1980-1992 period. After 1992 elasticities began to decrease in outsourcing industries. This finding is consistent with the model which suggests that a decline in the share of unskilled labor in total cost could result in such a decrease in labor demand elasticities, precisely when the level of outsourcing is high. Estimates at the two-digit industry level provide further evidence in support of the hypothesis that heavily outsourcing industries experience greater increases in their elasticities.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEstimating Measurement Error in SIPP Annual Job Earnings: A Comparison of Census Survey and SSA Administrative Data
September 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-24
The third chapter investigates measurement error in SIPP annual job earnings data linked to SSA administrative earnings data. The multiple earnings measures provided by the survey and administrative data enable the identification of components of true variation and variation due to measurement error. We find that 18% of the variation in SIPP annual job earnings can be attributed to measurement error. We also find that in both the SIPP and the DER, measurement error is persistent over time. A lower level of auto-correlation in the SIPP measurement error than in the economic error component leads to a lower reliability ratio of .62 for first-differenced earnings.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Measurement of Human Capital in the U.S. Economy
April 2002
Working Paper Number:
tp-2002-09
We develop a new approach to measuring human capital that permits the distinction of both observable and unobservable dimensions of skill by associating human capital with the portable part of an individual's wage rate. Using new large-scale, integrated employer-employee data containing information on 68 million individuals and 3.6 million firms, we explain a very large proportion (84%) of the total variation in wages rates and attribute substantial variation to both individual and employer heterogeneity. While the wage distribution remained largely unchanged between 1992-1997, we document a pronounced right shift in the overall distribution of human capital. Most workers entering our sample, while less experienced, were otherwise more highly skilled, a difference which can be attributed almost exclusively to unobservables. Nevertheless, compared to exiters and continuers, entrants exhibited a greater tendency to match to firms paying below average internal wages. Firms reduced employment shares of low skilled workers and increased employment shares of high skilled workers in virtually every industry. Our results strongly suggest that the distribution of human capital will continue to shift to the right, implying a continuing up-skilling of the employed labor force.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperOutput Market Segmentation and Productivity
June 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-07
Recent empirical investigations have shown enormous plant-level productivity heterogeneity, even within narrowly defined industries. Most of the theoretical explanations for this have focused on factors that influence the production process, such as idiosyncratic technology shocks or input price differences. I claim that characteristics of the output demand markets can also have predictable influences on the plant-level productivity distribution within an industry. Specifically, an industry's degree of output market segmentation (i.e., the substitutability of one plant's output for another's in that industry) should impact the dispersion and central tendency of the industry's plant-level productivity distribution. I test this notion empirically by seeing if measurable cross-sectional variation in market segmentation affects moments of industry's plant-level productivity distribution moments. I find significant and robust evidence consistent with this notion.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperARE FIXED EFFECTS FIXED? Persistence in Plant Level Productivity
May 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-03
Estimates of production functions suffer from an omitted variable problem; plant quality is an omitted variable that is likely to be correlated with variable inputs. One approach is to capture differences in plant qualities through plant specific intercepts, i.e., to estimate a fixed effects model. For this technique to work, it is necessary that differences in plant quality are more or less fixed; if the "fixed effects" erode over time, such a procedure becomes problematic, especially when working with long panels. In this paper, a standard fixed effects model, extended to allow for serial correlation in the error term, is applied to a 16-year panel of textile plants. This parametric approach strongly accepts the hypothesis of fixed effects. They account for about one-third of the variation in productivity. A simple non-parametric approach, however, concludes that differences in plant qualities erode over time, that is plant qualities f-mix. Monte Carlo results demonstrate that this discrepancy comes from the parametric approach imposing an overly restrictive functional form on the data; if there were fixed effects of the magnitude measured, one would reject the hypothesis of f-mixing. For textiles, at least, the functional form of a fixed effects model appears to generate misleading conclusions. A more flexible functional form is estimated. The "fixed" effects actually have a half life of approximately 10 to 20 years, and they account for about one-half the variation in productivity.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTechnology Locks, Creative Destruction And Non-Convergence In Productivity Levels
April 1995
Working Paper Number:
CES-95-06
This paper presents a simple solution to a new model that seeks to explain the distribution of plants across productivity levels within an industry, and empirically confirms some key predictions using the U.S. textile industry. In the model, plants are locked into a given productivity level, until they exit or retool. Convex costs of adjustment captures the fact that more productive plants expand faster. Provided there is technical change, productivity levels do not converge; the model achieves persistent dispersion in productivity levels within the context of a distortion free competitive equilibrium. The equilibrium, however, is rather turbulent; plants continually come on line with the cutting edge technology, gradually expand and finally exit or retool when they cease to recover their variable costs. The more productive plants create jobs, while the less productive destroy them. The model establishes a close link between productivity growth and dispersion in productivity levels; more rapid productivity growth leads to more widespread dispersion. This prediction is empirically confirmed. Additionally, the model provides an explanation for S-shaped diffusion.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPrimary Versus Secondary Production Techniques in U.S. Manufacturing
October 1994
Working Paper Number:
CES-94-12
In this paper we discuss and analyze a classical economic puzzle: whether differences in factor intensities reflect patterns of specialization or the co-existence of alternative techniques to produce output. We use observations on a large cross-section of U.S. manufacturing plants from the Census of Manufactures, including those that make goods primary to other industries, to study differences in production techniques. We find that in most cases material requirements do not depend on whether goods are made as primary products or as secondary products, which suggests that differences in factor intensities usually reflect patterns of specialization. A few cases where secondary production techniques do differ notably are discussed in more detail. However, overall the regression results support the neoclassical assumption that a single, best-practice technique is chosen for making each product.View Full Paper PDF
