Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:06:55.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Low-skilled unemployment, capital-skill complementarity and embodied technical progress*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

E. Moreno-Galbis  and
H.R. Sneessens
Get access

Summary

Models developed by recent economic literature do not manage to account simultaneously for the three main stylized facts observed in many EU countries since the mid-seventies: (i) the increase in the overall unemployment rate; (ii) the difference between high-skilled and low-skilled unemployment; (iii) the stability of relative wages. This paper focuses on these issues. We construct an intertemporal general equilibrium model seeking to reproduce these facts. We consider two types of jobs and two types of workers. We allow for job competition between high- and low-skilled workers on the low-skilled segment of the labor market and for on-the-job search. Matching processes are represented by matching functions á la Pissarides. Low-skilled search intensities are endogenous and high-skilled workers decide on the amount of effort they devote to search in each labor market segment. Biased technological change is introduced via embodied technical progress and capital- skill complementarity. The model is calibrated and simulated to evaluate the impact of various types of shocks. The model reproduces quite well the unemployment rate changes and the relative wage stability observed over the past two decades.

Résumé

Résumé

La plupart des modèles développés par la littérature économique récente, ne réussissent pas à prendre simultanément en considération les trois faits stylisés qui ont caractérisé les économies européennes depuis la deuxième mitant des années soixante-dix : i) la hausse du taux de chômage agrégé, ii) la divergence entre les taux de chômage des travailleurs qualifiés et non qualifiés et iii) la stabilité des salaires relatifs. Nous proposons un modèle d'équilibre général intertemporel visant à la reproduction de ces faits. On distingue deux types de postes de travail et deux types de travailleurs. Les travailleurs qualifiés sont en concurrence avec les non qualifiés sur le segment du marché des emplois non qualifiés (emplois simples). Parallèlement les travailleurs qualifiés occupant ces postes simples peuvent continuer à chercher un autre poste de travail pendant leur temps libre. Le processus d'appariement entre firmes et travailleurs est représenté par des fonctions à la Pissarides. L'intensité de recherche d'emploi des travailleurs non qualifiés est endogène et les travailleurs qualifiés décident la quantité d'effort qu'ils consacrent à la recherche d'un emploi sur chaque marché. Le changement technologique biaisé est introduit via le progrès technologique incorporé et la relation de complémentarité entre les nouvelles technologies et le travail qualifié. Le modèle est échelonnée et simulé afin d'évaluer l'impact de différent types de chocs. Le modèle reproduit de façon satisfaisante l'évolution des taux de chômage et la rigidité salariale observées pendant les dernières décennies.

Keywords

skill mismatchequilibrium unemploymentskill biased technological progressladder effectmacro dynamicsE24J21J23inadaptation des compétenceschômage d'équilibreprogrès technolo-gique biaisé en faveur du chômage qualifiéeffet d'évictiondynamique macroéconomiqueE24J21J23
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 73 , Issue 3 , 2007 , pp. 241 - 272
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 2007 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

***

H.R. Sneessens is Professor of Economics at the Université Catholique de Louvain and Université Catholique de Lille.

*

We would like to thank seminar participants at the IZA Summer School 2003, Jamboree 2003 (Pompeu Fabra University) and two anonymous referees. We are especially indebted to Francois Langot for very useful suggestions. Any remaining errors are ours.

References

Albrecht, J., and Vroman, S. 2002. “A matching Model with Endogenous Skill Requirements.” International Economic Review 43:283–305.Google Scholar
Andolfatto, D. 1996. “Business cycles and labour-market search.” American Economic Review 86 (1): 112–132.Google Scholar
Autor, D.H., Katz, L.F., and Krueger, A.B.. 1998. “Computing inequality: Have computers changed the labour market?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 113:1169–1213.Google Scholar
Berman, E., Bound, J. and Griliches, Z.. 1994. “Changes in the demand for skilled labor within U.S. manufacturing: evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufacturers.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 109:367–397.Google Scholar
Blanchard, O., and Wolfers, J. 2000. “The Role of Shocks and Institutions in the Rise of European Unemployment: The Aggregate Evidence.” The Economic Journal 110 (462): 1–33 (March).Google Scholar
Boucekkine, R., del Rio, F. and Licandro, O.. 2003. “Embodied Technological Progress, Learning and the Productivity Slowdown.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 105:87–98.Google Scholar
Bresnahan, T.F., Brynjolfsson, E. and Hitt, L.M.. 2002. “Information Technology, Workplace organization, and the Demand for skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 (1): 339–376.Google Scholar
Burdett, K., and Mortensen, D.. 1998. “Wage Differentials, Employmer Size and Unemployment.” International Economic Review 39 (2): 257–273.Google Scholar
Buttler, F., and Tessaring, M.. 1993. “Human Kapital als Standortfaktor.” Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt und Berufsforschung 26, no. 4.Google Scholar
Caroli, E., and Van Reenen, J.. 2001. “Skilled Biased Technological Change? Evidence from a Pannel of British and French Establishments.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (4): 1449–1492.Google Scholar
CESRW. 2001. “Rapport sur la Situation Economique et Sociale de la Wallonie.” Conseil Economique et Sociale de la R egion Wallonne, Décembre, 118–119.Google Scholar
Cockx, B., and Dejemeppe, M.. 2004. “Do the Higher Educated Unemployed Crowd out the Lower Educated Ones in a Competition for Jobs?” fothcoming in Journal of Applied Econometrics.Google Scholar
Collard, F., Fonseca, R., and Munoz, R.. 2002. “Spanish unemployment persistence and ladder effect.” Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Delmotte, J., Van Hootegem, G., and Dejonckheere, J.. 2001. “Les entreprises et le recrutement en Belgique en 2000.” HIV A, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, and UPEDI.Google Scholar
Denolf, L., Denys, J., and Simoens, P.. 2001. “Les Entreprises et le Recrutement en Belgique en 2000.” HIVA, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
Dolado, J., Felgueroso, F. and Jimeno, J.. 2000. “Youth labour markets in Spain: Education, training and crowding-out,.” European Economie Review 44:943–956.Google Scholar
Dolado, J., Jansen, M., and Jimeno, J.. 2002. “A matching model of crowding out and on the job search (with an application to Spain).” mimeo.Google Scholar
Fonseca, R., Maillard, B., and Sneessens, H.. 1998. “Structural Adjustment and Unemployment Persistence: The Case of France and Spain.” Robert Schuman Center Discussion Paper, no. 98/47.Google Scholar
Forgeot, G., and Gautié, J.. 1997. “Insertion Professionnelle des jeunes et processus de déclassement.” Economie et Statistique 4/5 (304–305): 53–74.Google Scholar
Gautier, P.A. 2002. “Unemployment and Search Externalities in a Model with Heterogeneous Jobs and Heterogeneous Workers.” Economica 69:21–40.Google Scholar
Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., and Krussel, P.. 1997. “Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technological Change.” American Economic Review 87 (3): 342–362.Google Scholar
Hall, R. 2005. “Employment Efficiency and Sticky wages: evidence from Flows in the Labor Market.” The Review of Economic and Statistics 87 (3): 397–407 (August).Google Scholar
Hall, R., and Milgrom, P.. 2005. “The Limited Influence of Unemployment on the Wage Bargain.” Mimeo, Stanford University, September.Google Scholar
Hartog, J. 2000. “Over-education and earnings: where are we, where should we go?” Economics of Education Review 19:131–147.Google Scholar
Krusell, P., Ohanian, L.E., Rios-Rull, J.V. and Violante, G.L.. 2000. “Capital skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis.” Econometrica 68 (5): 1029–53.Google Scholar
Lindquist, M. 2004. “Capital-Skill Complementarity and Inequality over the Business Cycle.” Review of Economic Dynamics 7 (3): 519–540 (July).Google Scholar
Machin, S., and Van Reenen, J.. 1998. “Technology and changes in skill structure: Evidence from seven OECD countries.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 113:1215–44.Google Scholar
Mairesse, J., Cette, G., and Kocoglu, Y.. 2000. “Les Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication en France: Diffusion et Contribution à la Croissance.” Economie et Statistique 9/10 (339–340): 117–146.Google Scholar
Manacorda, M., and Petrongolo, B.. 1999. “Skill Mismatch and Unemployment in OECD countries.” Economica 66:181–207.Google Scholar
Merz, M. 1995. “Search in the labor market and real business cycle.” Journal of Monetary Economics 36:269–300.Google Scholar
Muysken, J., and ter Weel, B.. 1999. “Overeducation, Job Competition and Unemployment.” MERIT DP 99032, Maastricht University.Google Scholar
Nickell, S., and Quintini, G.. 2001, 4 September. The Recent Performance of the UK Labor Market. Paper presented in the Economics Section of the British Association for the Advanement of Science.Google Scholar
OECD. 1996, July. “OECD Employment Outlook.” Technical Report, OECD.Google Scholar
Patacchini, E., and Zenou, Y.. 2003. “Search Intensity, Cost of Living and Local Labor Markets in Britain.” IZA Discussion Paper No 772, Bonn, May.Google Scholar
Petrongolo, B., and Pissarides, C.. 2001. “Looking Back into the Black Box: a Survey of the Matching Function.” Journal of Economic Literature 39:390–431.Google Scholar
Pierrard, O. 2004. “Impacts of Selective Reductions in Labor Taxation.” mimeo. Catholic University of Louvain.Google Scholar
Pierrard, O., and Sneessens, H.. 2002. “Low Skilled Unemployment, Biased Technological Change and Job Competition.” mimeo, 1RES, Université Catolique de Louvain.Google Scholar
Pissarides, C. 2000. Equilibrium Unemployment Theory. Edited by MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Postel-Vinay, F., and Robin, J.M.. 2002. “Equilibrium Wage Dispersion with Worker and Employer Heterogeneity.” Econometrica 70 (6): 2295–2350.Google Scholar
Shimer, R. 2005. “On-the-job Search and Strategic Bargaining.” Mimeo, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Sneessens, H., and Shadman, F.. 2000. “Analyse macro-économique des effets de réductions ciblées des charges sociales.” Revue belge sécurité sociale, no. 3:613–630.Google Scholar
Van der Linden, B., and Dor, E.. 2001. “Labor market policies and equilibrium employment: Theory and application for Belgium.” IRES Discussion Paper. Catholic University of Louvain., no. 2001–05.Google Scholar