Differences in Labor Supply to Monopsonistic Firms and the Gender Pay Gap: An Empirical Analysis Using Linked Employer‐Employee Data from Germany
Boris Hirsch, Thorsten Schank, Claus Schnabel
Journal of Labor Economics,
No. 2,
2010
Abstract
This article investigates women’s and men’s labor supply to the firm within a semistructural approach based on a dynamic model of new monopsony. Using methods of survival analysis and a large linked employer‐employee data set for Germany, we find that labor supply elasticities are small (1.9–3.7) and that women’s labor supply to the firm is less elastic than men’s (which is the reverse of gender differences in labor supply usually found at the level of the market). Our results imply that at least one‐third of the gender pay gap might be wage discrimination by profit‐maximizing monopsonistic employers.
Read article
Monopsonistic Labour Markets and the Gender Pay Gap: Theory and Empirical Evidence
Boris Hirsch
Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems,
No. 639,
2010
Abstract
This book investigates models of spatial and dynamic monopsony and their application to the persistent empirical regularity of the gender pay gap. Theoretically, the main conclusion is that employers possess more monopsony power over their female employees if women are less driven by pecuniary considerations in their choice of employers than men. Employers may exploit this to increase their profits at the detriment of women’s wages. Empirically, it is indeed found that women’s labour supply to the firm is less wage-elastic than men’s and that at least a third of the gender pay gap in the data investigated may result from employers engaging in monopsonistic discrimination. Therefore, a monopsonistic approach to gender discrimination in the labour market clearly contributes to the economic understanding of the gender pay gap. It not only provides an intuitively appealing explanation of the gap from standard economic reasoning, but it is also corroborated by empirical observation.
Read article
Beyond Incubation: An Analysis of Firm Survival and Exit Dynamics in the Post-graduation Period
Michael Schwartz
Journal of Technology Transfer,
2009
Abstract
With regard to the survival rates of business incubator (BI) firms, the literature mainly presents findings of failure rates only during the incubation period. Little is known about the survival or exit dynamics of firms after leaving the incubator facilities. The study approaches this research question by examining the survival of 352 firms from five German BIs after their graduation. The findings suggest that graduation causes an immediate negative effect on survivability that lasts up to three years after leaving the incubators. Furthermore, heterogeneous patterns of post-graduation exit dynamics between the BIs were observed. It was also found that performance during the incubation period is an indicator of the propensity of business closure after graduation. This study offers valuable insights and implications for all stakeholders of BI-initiatives.
Read article
Evaluating the German (New Keynesian) Phillips Curve
Rolf Scheufele
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 10,
2008
Abstract
This paper evaluates the New Keynesian Phillips Curve (NKPC) and its hybrid
variant within a limited information framework for Germany. The main interest rests on the average frequency of price re-optimization of firms. We use the labor income share as the driving variable and consider a source of real rigidity by allowing for a fixed firm-specific capital stock. A GMM estimation strategy is employed as well as an identification robust method that is based upon the Anderson-Rubin statistic. We find out that the German Phillips Curve is purely forward looking. Moreover, our point estimates are consistent with the view that firms re-optimize prices every two to three quarters. While these estimates seem plausible from an economic point of view, the uncertainties around these estimates are very large and also consistent with perfect nominal price rigidity where firms never re-optimize prices. This analysis also offers some explanations why previous results for the German NKPC based on GMM differ considerably. First, standard GMM results are very sensitive to the way how orthogonality conditions are formulated. Additionally, model misspecifications may be left undetected by conventional J tests. Taken together, this analysis points out
the need for identification robust methods to get reliable estimates for the NKPC.
Read article
