Table 6. Demand for Commuters and Migrants in Rural Industry
Dependent Variable: |
Percent of Incoming Workers among |
Percent of Commuters among |
Percent of Migrants among Workers | ||||||||||
_______1988 |
_______1995 |
_______1988 |
_______1995 |
_______1988 |
_______1995_______ | ||||||||
OLS |
Tobit |
OLS |
Tobit |
OLS |
Tobit |
OLS |
Tobit |
OLS |
Tobit |
OLS |
Tobit | ||
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
(7) |
(8) |
(9) |
(10) |
(11) |
(12) | ||
Costs | |||||||||||||
Local Labor Costa |
(1) |
0.013 |
0.007 |
0.013 |
0.013 |
-0.0005 |
-0.03 (0.48) |
-0.002 |
-0.009 |
0.01 |
0.06 |
0.15* |
0.015 |
Lagged Dependent |
(2) |
- |
- |
28.5 |
32.0 |
- |
- |
31.9*** |
38.8** |
- |
- |
49.8*** |
69.0*** |
Industry Featuresb | |||||||||||||
Private Enterprise |
(3) |
17.9** |
29.9** |
4.3 |
5.2 |
3.9 |
10.6 |
7.5 |
6.0 |
13.9* |
70.3** |
-4.19 |
-4.7 |
Light Industry |
(4) |
27.6*** |
50.5*** |
13.8* |
19.8** |
29.2*** |
60.4*** |
11.4* |
19.8** |
-1.6 |
3.0 |
1.66 |
12.3 |
Village Features | |||||||||||||
Size of Labor Force(5) |
-0.03** (2.24) |
-0.05* |
-0.01 (1.06) |
-0.01 |
-0.001 |
-0.02 (0.81) |
-0.02** |
-0.03** |
-0.02 (1.65) |
-0.05 (1.18) |
0.012* |
0.02* | |
Size of Arable |
(6) |
0.01* |
0.02** |
0.0002 |
-0.001 |
0.01** |
0.02** |
0.002 |
0.002 |
0.002 |
0.005 |
-0.003 |
-0.004 |
Land |
(2.08) |
(2.39) |
(0.05) |
(0.21) |
(2.21) |
(2.50) |
(0.80) |
(0.46) |
(0.43) |
(0.39) |
(1.09) |
(0.95) | |
F-Stat on |
(7) |
1.7 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
1.72 |
1.9* |
1.9* |
3.2*** |
3.1*** |
1.3 |
0.8 |
4.8*** |
4.3*** |
Provincial | |||||||||||||
Adj. R-Squared |
(8) |
0.38 |
- |
0.24 |
- |
0.41 |
- |
0.36 |
- |
0.23 |
- |
0.43 |
- |
Absolute value of t-stats in parenthesis; *, **, *** indicate significance at 10, 5 and 1 percent respectively
a The wage male workers commuting out of the village receive. Female and male workers’ wages are highly correlated so cannot be used together. This wage is also not
simultaneously determined with village enterprise hiring decisions since it is observed outside the village.
b Dummy variable for whether the village has a private enterprise or a light industrial enterprise
41
More intriguing information
1. Partner Selection Criteria in Strategic Alliances When to Ally with Weak Partners2. Consumption Behaviour in Zambia: The Link to Poverty Alleviation?
3. Modelling the health related benefits of environmental policies - a CGE analysis for the eu countries with gem-e3
4. Structural Influences on Participation Rates: A Canada-U.S. Comparison
5. WP RR 17 - Industrial relations in the transport sector in the Netherlands
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. International Financial Integration*
9. STIMULATING COOPERATION AMONG FARMERS IN A POST-SOCIALIST ECONOMY: LESSONS FROM A PUBLIC-PRIVATE MARKETING PARTNERSHIP IN POLAND
10. The name is absent