劳动力供应的跨时空替代:荟萃分析

IF 2.3 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Ali Elminejad , Tomas Havranek , Roman Horvath , Zuzana Irsova
{"title":"劳动力供应的跨时空替代:荟萃分析","authors":"Ali Elminejad ,&nbsp;Tomas Havranek ,&nbsp;Roman Horvath ,&nbsp;Zuzana Irsova","doi":"10.1016/j.red.2023.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>The intertemporal substitution (Frisch) elasticity of labor supply governs how structural models predict changes in people's willingness to work in response to changes in economic conditions or government fiscal policy. We show that the mean reported estimates of the elasticity are exaggerated due to publication bias. For both the intensive and extensive margins the literature provides over 700 estimates, with a mean of 0.5 in both cases. Correcting for publication bias and emphasizing quasi-experimental evidence reduces the mean intensive margin elasticity to 0.2 and renders the extensive margin elasticity tiny. A total hours elasticity of about 0.25 is the most consistent with empirical evidence. To trace the differences in reported elasticities to differences in estimation context, we collect 23 variables reflecting study design and employ </span>Bayesian and frequentist model averaging to address model uncertainty. On both margins the elasticity is systematically larger for women and workers near retirement, but not enough to support a total hours elasticity above 0.5.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47890,"journal":{"name":"Review of Economic Dynamics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intertemporal substitution in labor supply: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ali Elminejad ,&nbsp;Tomas Havranek ,&nbsp;Roman Horvath ,&nbsp;Zuzana Irsova\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.red.2023.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>The intertemporal substitution (Frisch) elasticity of labor supply governs how structural models predict changes in people's willingness to work in response to changes in economic conditions or government fiscal policy. We show that the mean reported estimates of the elasticity are exaggerated due to publication bias. For both the intensive and extensive margins the literature provides over 700 estimates, with a mean of 0.5 in both cases. Correcting for publication bias and emphasizing quasi-experimental evidence reduces the mean intensive margin elasticity to 0.2 and renders the extensive margin elasticity tiny. A total hours elasticity of about 0.25 is the most consistent with empirical evidence. To trace the differences in reported elasticities to differences in estimation context, we collect 23 variables reflecting study design and employ </span>Bayesian and frequentist model averaging to address model uncertainty. On both margins the elasticity is systematically larger for women and workers near retirement, but not enough to support a total hours elasticity above 0.5.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Economic Dynamics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Economic Dynamics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094202523000686\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Economic Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094202523000686","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

劳动力供给的跨期替代(Frisch)弹性决定了结构模型如何预测人们的工作意愿会随着经济条件或政府财政政策的变化而变化。我们的研究表明,由于出版偏差,报告中对弹性的平均估计值被夸大了。对于密集边际和广泛边际,文献提供了 700 多个估计值,平均值均为 0.5。修正出版偏差并强调准实验证据后,密集边际弹性的平均值降至 0.2,而广泛边际弹性则变得很小。总工时弹性约为 0.25,这与经验证据最为吻合。为了追溯报告弹性的差异与估算背景的差异,我们收集了 23 个反映研究设计的变量,并采用贝叶斯和频数模型平均法来解决模型的不确定性。在这两个边际上,女性和临近退休的工人的弹性都系统性地增大,但不足以支持总工时弹性超过 0.5。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intertemporal substitution in labor supply: A meta-analysis

The intertemporal substitution (Frisch) elasticity of labor supply governs how structural models predict changes in people's willingness to work in response to changes in economic conditions or government fiscal policy. We show that the mean reported estimates of the elasticity are exaggerated due to publication bias. For both the intensive and extensive margins the literature provides over 700 estimates, with a mean of 0.5 in both cases. Correcting for publication bias and emphasizing quasi-experimental evidence reduces the mean intensive margin elasticity to 0.2 and renders the extensive margin elasticity tiny. A total hours elasticity of about 0.25 is the most consistent with empirical evidence. To trace the differences in reported elasticities to differences in estimation context, we collect 23 variables reflecting study design and employ Bayesian and frequentist model averaging to address model uncertainty. On both margins the elasticity is systematically larger for women and workers near retirement, but not enough to support a total hours elasticity above 0.5.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Review of Economic Dynamics publishes meritorious original contributions to dynamic economics. The scope of the journal is intended to be broad and to reflect the view of the Society for Economic Dynamics that the field of economics is unified by the scientific approach to economics. We will publish contributions in any area of economics provided they meet the highest standards of scientific research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信