Republic, Finland and Norway Rita Asplund (ETLA) Sami Napari (ETLA) - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
republic finland and norway
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Republic, Finland and Norway Rita Asplund (ETLA) Sami Napari (ETLA) - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 03, 2023 569 likes •817 views

Intangible Capital and Wages: A Comparison of the Czech Republic, Finland and Norway Rita Asplund (ETLA) Sami Napari (ETLA) INNODRIVE Final Conference Brussels, February 22 23, 2011 1 2/22/2011 ETLA Country differences in intangible

slide-1
SLIDE 1

2/22/2011 ETLA 1

Intangible Capital and Wages: A Comparison of the Czech Republic, Finland and Norway

Rita Asplund (ETLA) Sami Napari (ETLA)

INNODRIVE Final Conference

Brussels, February 22–23, 2011

slide-2
SLIDE 2

ETLA 2 2/22/2011

Country differences in intangible capital, 2006

Czech Republic Finland Norway Intangibles' share of GDP1 8.0 7.3 4.5 IC workers' share of white-collar manufacturing workers2 41.8 68.6 17.7 Female share of IC white-collar workers in manufacturing2 24.7 32.2 12.9

1: INNODRIVE database, 2005 2: About the datasets, see Asplund & Napari (2011)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

ETLA 3 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: full-time white-collar manufacturing

workers (age 18-64)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

ETLA 4 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

slide-5
SLIDE 5

ETLA 5 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

 Variable of interest: total hourly wage

slide-6
SLIDE 6

ETLA 6 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

 Variable of interest: total hourly wage  Control variables:

 Gender

slide-7
SLIDE 7

ETLA 7 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

 Variable of interest: total hourly wage  Control variables:

 Gender  Years of formal education

slide-8
SLIDE 8

ETLA 8 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

 Variable of interest: total hourly wage  Control variables:

 Gender  Years of formal education  Years of potential work experience

slide-9
SLIDE 9

ETLA 9 2/22/2011

Overall framework

 Year investigated: 2006  Worker group analyzed: white-collar manufacturing workers  Two distinct occupational categories:

 IC group: R&D, ICT, management and marketing personnel  non-IC group: all other white-collar manufacturing workers

 Variable of interest: total hourly wage  Control variables:

 Gender  Years of formal education  Years of potential work experience  Years of seniority (except for the Czech Republic)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

ETLA 10 2/22/2011

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution Czech Republic

slide-11
SLIDE 11

ETLA 11 2/22/2011

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution Czech Republic Finland

slide-12
SLIDE 12

ETLA 12 2/22/2011

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution Czech Republic Finland Norway

slide-13
SLIDE 13

ETLA 13 2/22/2011

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group: Decomposition results

slide-14
SLIDE 14

ETLA 14 2/22/2011

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group: Decomposition results

slide-15
SLIDE 15

ETLA 15 2/22/2011

Wage gaps between IC group and non-IC group: Decomposition results

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

slide-16
SLIDE 16

ETLA 16 2/22/2011

Summary of main findings: General comparison across occupation groups

 In all three countries, innovation workers have

higher average wages than non-innovation workers

 This average wage gap, however, hides a lot of

variation across the wage distribution

 Countries differ both in terms of occupation wage-gap

profiles and major factors contributing to the wage gap

 Difficult, although interesting, question is what drives

country differences in results

slide-17
SLIDE 17

ETLA 17 2/22/2011

Gender wage gaps in IC group and non-IC group

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Innovation workers

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Other workers

Czech Republic

slide-18
SLIDE 18

ETLA 18 2/22/2011

Gender wage gaps in IC group and non-IC group

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Innovation workers

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Other workers

Czech Republic Finland

slide-19
SLIDE 19

ETLA 19 2/22/2011

Gender wage gaps in IC group and non-IC group

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Innovation workers

  • 0.40
  • 0.35
  • 0.30
  • 0.25
  • 0.20
  • 0.15
  • 0.10
  • 0.05

0.00 0.05 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Lower half of wage distribution Upper half of wage distribution

Other workers

Czech Republic Finland Norway

slide-20
SLIDE 20

ETLA 20 2/22/2011

Gender wage gaps in IC group: Decomposition results

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

slide-21
SLIDE 21

ETLA 21 2/22/2011

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

Gender wage gaps in IC group: Decomposition results

slide-22
SLIDE 22

ETLA 22 2/22/2011

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Czech Republic

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Finland

  • 0.50
  • 0.40
  • 0.30
  • 0.20
  • 0.10

0.00 0.10 Log wage differential .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Wage distribution

Norway

Total differential Effects of differences in characteristics

Gender wage gaps in IC group: Decomposition results

slide-23
SLIDE 23

ETLA 23 2/22/2011

Summary of main findings: Gender wage gap analysis

 The gender wage gap is, on average, slightly higher

among innovation than non-innovation workers

 Among non-innovation workers there is a tendency of

increasing gender wage gaps when moving up through the wage distribution; no clear-cut pattern among innovation workers

 Gender wage gaps are due to males and females being

differently rewarded for similar human capital endowments, not because of women having lower levels of basic human capital

 Again, what drives country differences in gender wage

gaps across occupation groups?