Loading…
EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION
We show empirically that high-risk sectors, which contribute strongly to aggregate productivity growth, are relatively small and have relatively low productivity growth in countries with strict employment protection legislation (EPL). To understand these findings, we develop a two-sector matching mo...
Saved in:
Published in: | International economic review (Philadelphia) 2016-08, Vol.57 (3), p.787-826 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3 |
container_end_page | 826 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 787 |
container_title | International economic review (Philadelphia) |
container_volume | 57 |
creator | Bartelsman, Eric J. Gautier, Pieter A. De Wind, Joris |
description | We show empirically that high-risk sectors, which contribute strongly to aggregate productivity growth, are relatively small and have relatively low productivity growth in countries with strict employment protection legislation (EPL). To understand these findings, we develop a two-sector matching model where firms endogenously choose between a safe technology and a risky technology. For firms that have chosen the risky technology, EPL raises the costs of shedding workers in case they receive a low productivity draw. According to our calibrated model, high-EPL countries benefit less from the arrival of new risky technologies than low-EPL countries. Parameters estimated through reduced-form regressions of employment and productivity on exit costs, riskiness, and in particular their interaction are qualitatively similar for actual cross-country data and simulated model data. Our model is consistent with the slowdown in productivity in the European Union relative to the United States since the mid-1990s. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/iere.12176 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1812207864</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>44075369</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>44075369</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1LwzAYh4MoOKcX70LBm6wzX03Sk3S1rsWuHbUydgrplkLnR2e6ofvv7azuaC5v4Pc87ws_AC4RHKL23Vba6CHCiLMj0EOUCRsThx6DHoQY2sxxxSk4a5oVhJARynvgLphM43Q-CZLcmmZpHvh5lCYDq_2ESRqn47nlh2nkBwPLS-6tWZo9BpnlxXHqe3vyHJyU6rXRF7-zD54fgtwP7VaNfC-2Fw7mzHYLTBBXJdZqidkSwgKWRLiuKjnkyMFU8FI4GCMFUUkRx1hAQtVSEeSyQhWkD667vWtTf2x1s5Gremve25MSCYQx5ILRlrrpqIWpm8boUq5N9abMTiIo9wXJfUHyp6AWRh38Wb3q3T-kjIIs-HOuOmfVbGpzcCiF3CHMbXO7y6tmo78OuTIvknHCHTlLxtLhTyNBw5EckW9n9Xio</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1812207864</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION</title><source>EconLit s plnými texty</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Bartelsman, Eric J. ; Gautier, Pieter A. ; De Wind, Joris</creator><creatorcontrib>Bartelsman, Eric J. ; Gautier, Pieter A. ; De Wind, Joris</creatorcontrib><description>We show empirically that high-risk sectors, which contribute strongly to aggregate productivity growth, are relatively small and have relatively low productivity growth in countries with strict employment protection legislation (EPL). To understand these findings, we develop a two-sector matching model where firms endogenously choose between a safe technology and a risky technology. For firms that have chosen the risky technology, EPL raises the costs of shedding workers in case they receive a low productivity draw. According to our calibrated model, high-EPL countries benefit less from the arrival of new risky technologies than low-EPL countries. Parameters estimated through reduced-form regressions of employment and productivity on exit costs, riskiness, and in particular their interaction are qualitatively similar for actual cross-country data and simulated model data. Our model is consistent with the slowdown in productivity in the European Union relative to the United States since the mid-1990s.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-6598</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2354</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/iere.12176</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Decision making models ; Employment ; Labor law ; Productivity ; Risk assessment ; Studies ; Technology adoption</subject><ispartof>International economic review (Philadelphia), 2016-08, Vol.57 (3), p.787-826</ispartof><rights>2016 Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania and the Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association</rights><rights>(2016) by the Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania and the Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Aug 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44075369$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/44075369$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33223,58238,58471</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bartelsman, Eric J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautier, Pieter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Wind, Joris</creatorcontrib><title>EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION</title><title>International economic review (Philadelphia)</title><addtitle>International Economic Review</addtitle><description>We show empirically that high-risk sectors, which contribute strongly to aggregate productivity growth, are relatively small and have relatively low productivity growth in countries with strict employment protection legislation (EPL). To understand these findings, we develop a two-sector matching model where firms endogenously choose between a safe technology and a risky technology. For firms that have chosen the risky technology, EPL raises the costs of shedding workers in case they receive a low productivity draw. According to our calibrated model, high-EPL countries benefit less from the arrival of new risky technologies than low-EPL countries. Parameters estimated through reduced-form regressions of employment and productivity on exit costs, riskiness, and in particular their interaction are qualitatively similar for actual cross-country data and simulated model data. Our model is consistent with the slowdown in productivity in the European Union relative to the United States since the mid-1990s.</description><subject>Decision making models</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Labor law</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Technology adoption</subject><issn>0020-6598</issn><issn>1468-2354</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1LwzAYh4MoOKcX70LBm6wzX03Sk3S1rsWuHbUydgrplkLnR2e6ofvv7azuaC5v4Pc87ws_AC4RHKL23Vba6CHCiLMj0EOUCRsThx6DHoQY2sxxxSk4a5oVhJARynvgLphM43Q-CZLcmmZpHvh5lCYDq_2ESRqn47nlh2nkBwPLS-6tWZo9BpnlxXHqe3vyHJyU6rXRF7-zD54fgtwP7VaNfC-2Fw7mzHYLTBBXJdZqidkSwgKWRLiuKjnkyMFU8FI4GCMFUUkRx1hAQtVSEeSyQhWkD667vWtTf2x1s5Gremve25MSCYQx5ILRlrrpqIWpm8boUq5N9abMTiIo9wXJfUHyp6AWRh38Wb3q3T-kjIIs-HOuOmfVbGpzcCiF3CHMbXO7y6tmo78OuTIvknHCHTlLxtLhTyNBw5EckW9n9Xio</recordid><startdate>201608</startdate><enddate>201608</enddate><creator>Bartelsman, Eric J.</creator><creator>Gautier, Pieter A.</creator><creator>De Wind, Joris</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201608</creationdate><title>EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION</title><author>Bartelsman, Eric J. ; Gautier, Pieter A. ; De Wind, Joris</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Decision making models</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Labor law</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Technology adoption</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bartelsman, Eric J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gautier, Pieter A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Wind, Joris</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>International economic review (Philadelphia)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bartelsman, Eric J.</au><au>Gautier, Pieter A.</au><au>De Wind, Joris</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION</atitle><jtitle>International economic review (Philadelphia)</jtitle><addtitle>International Economic Review</addtitle><date>2016-08</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>787</spage><epage>826</epage><pages>787-826</pages><issn>0020-6598</issn><eissn>1468-2354</eissn><abstract>We show empirically that high-risk sectors, which contribute strongly to aggregate productivity growth, are relatively small and have relatively low productivity growth in countries with strict employment protection legislation (EPL). To understand these findings, we develop a two-sector matching model where firms endogenously choose between a safe technology and a risky technology. For firms that have chosen the risky technology, EPL raises the costs of shedding workers in case they receive a low productivity draw. According to our calibrated model, high-EPL countries benefit less from the arrival of new risky technologies than low-EPL countries. Parameters estimated through reduced-form regressions of employment and productivity on exit costs, riskiness, and in particular their interaction are qualitatively similar for actual cross-country data and simulated model data. Our model is consistent with the slowdown in productivity in the European Union relative to the United States since the mid-1990s.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/iere.12176</doi><tpages>40</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0020-6598 |
ispartof | International economic review (Philadelphia), 2016-08, Vol.57 (3), p.787-826 |
issn | 0020-6598 1468-2354 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1812207864 |
source | EconLit s plnými texty; EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | Decision making models Employment Labor law Productivity Risk assessment Studies Technology adoption |
title | EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY CHOICE, AND WORKER ALLOCATION |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T20%3A10%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=EMPLOYMENT%20PROTECTION,%20TECHNOLOGY%20CHOICE,%20AND%20WORKER%20ALLOCATION&rft.jtitle=International%20economic%20review%20(Philadelphia)&rft.au=Bartelsman,%20Eric%20J.&rft.date=2016-08&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=787&rft.epage=826&rft.pages=787-826&rft.issn=0020-6598&rft.eissn=1468-2354&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/iere.12176&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E44075369%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5276-9b2317af2ead26d00b0f3899af707152487f85221a01f417228034ada3196bab3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1812207864&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=44075369&rfr_iscdi=true |