1997
DOI: 10.2307/1061046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Imperfect Labor Mobility and Unemployment in LDCs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Among other reasons they could earn more, or at least hope to earn more; also, they value self-employment and the relative independence. 5 Casas [4] derives this type of labour supply from a CES utility function.…”
Section: Reduced Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Among other reasons they could earn more, or at least hope to earn more; also, they value self-employment and the relative independence. 5 Casas [4] derives this type of labour supply from a CES utility function.…”
Section: Reduced Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With two different rates of pay earned by unskilled people in two different segments of the labour market, the model includes an unemployment rate attributed to both imperfect labour mobility and a sector-specific sticky wage. Some authors, like Parai and Beladi [5], explain unemployment rates through the manufacturing sticky wages, of the Harris-Todaro variety. Wei and Yabuuchi [6] additionally examine the implications of wage subsidy policy and factor production growth on the rate of unemployment, also using the Harris-Todaro model.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other writers, such as Mussa (1982), Feenstra and Lewis (1994) and Lo pez and Schiff (1998) have used very general functions generating imperfect intersectoral transformation of labour, justifying these by largely unspecified barriers to relocation which are assumed to be distributed across individuals. This very general approach to the modelling of relocation costs has been taken even further by Hill and Mendez (1983), Casas (1984), Parai and Yu (1991), Beladi and Parai (1993) and Parai and Beladi (1997) who introduce imperfect factor mobility simply by assuming different elasticities of labour supply to different sectors, with no explicit attempt to model their economic basis. The model of Epstein et al (1999), in which income is differentially distributed across workers through political patronage, is also an example, although the paper was concerned with international migration.…”
Section: Position-dependent Costs With Non-marketable Labour Market Pmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most literature, however, assumes labor to be fully employed though the movement between sectors is sluggish. An exception is Parai and Beladi (1997) who extend the Casas model by incorporating unemployment à la Harris and Todaro (1970), and discussed some issues on growth and gains from trade. Their arguments are further elaborated by Gilbert and Mikic (1998) and Parai and Beladi (1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%