{"title":"美国的工会化与融合","authors":"John Meszaros","doi":"10.52324/001C.18970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using data on U.S. state-level unionization from Hirsch et al. (2001) and the club convergence test developed by Phillips and Sul (2007, 2009), this paper shows that U.S. states have distinct groupings in terms of the level of unionization. In particular, the states in the American South generally belong to their own low union density groups. Further, states in the Northeast (such as New York) and the Great Lakes regions (Michigan, Ohio) tend to have higher levels of unionization and form their own convergence clubs.","PeriodicalId":44865,"journal":{"name":"Review of Regional Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unionization and Convergence in the United States\",\"authors\":\"John Meszaros\",\"doi\":\"10.52324/001C.18970\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using data on U.S. state-level unionization from Hirsch et al. (2001) and the club convergence test developed by Phillips and Sul (2007, 2009), this paper shows that U.S. states have distinct groupings in terms of the level of unionization. In particular, the states in the American South generally belong to their own low union density groups. Further, states in the Northeast (such as New York) and the Great Lakes regions (Michigan, Ohio) tend to have higher levels of unionization and form their own convergence clubs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Regional Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Regional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52324/001C.18970\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Regional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52324/001C.18970","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Using data on U.S. state-level unionization from Hirsch et al. (2001) and the club convergence test developed by Phillips and Sul (2007, 2009), this paper shows that U.S. states have distinct groupings in terms of the level of unionization. In particular, the states in the American South generally belong to their own low union density groups. Further, states in the Northeast (such as New York) and the Great Lakes regions (Michigan, Ohio) tend to have higher levels of unionization and form their own convergence clubs.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
