Determinants of Employment Intensity of Growth in India: An Insight from Panel Data

被引:2
|
作者
Irshad, Mohd [1 ]
Qayed, Syed Hasan [1 ]
机构
[1] Maulana Azad Natl Urdu Univ, Dept Econ, Hyderabad 500032, Telangana, India
关键词
Employment intensity of growth; labour quality; underemployment; labour market regulation; dynamic ordinary least square; MACROECONOMIC DETERMINANTS; ECONOMIC-GROWTH; OKUNS LAW; LABOR; COINTEGRATION; REGRESSION; TESTS;
D O I
10.1177/09763996231175989
中图分类号
K9 [地理];
学科分类号
0705 ;
摘要
This study examines the employment elasticity of growth at the sectoral level using the KLEMS database for the period 1980-1981 to 2018-2019. After estimating elasticity, we employ the dynamic ordinary least square (DOLS) technique to investigate its determinants. The elasticity for the overall period falls between 0.91 and -0.039. Elasticity estimation at the sub-period level varies across three different sub-periods. Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing, and mining and quarrying observed negative elasticity of -0.58 and -0.63, respectively, whereas services and construction show the highest positive elasticity. The DOLS estimation shows that in the full panel, labour quality and wages positively impact employment elasticity of growth, whereas the dummy representing the reforms of 1991 negatively impacts employment elasticity. The magnitude of the coefficient of the workers involved in strikes and lockouts and days lost due to strikes is zero although it is significant. The sectoral analysis shows that the sign and significance of the coefficients vary across the industries except for labour quality. Labour quality is positively significant for almost all the industries in both equations. Wages and employment elasticity observe unique patterns, for example relatively highest and lowest-paying sectors observe reduced employment elasticity. Finally, we suggest that specific policy formulation and efforts are needed to be in place to promote quality of labour and relish real demographic dividends.
引用
收藏
页数:29
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Macroeconomic Determinants of Employment Intensity of Growth in India
    Pattanaik, Falguni
    Nayak, Narayan
    MARGIN-JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2014, 8 (02): : 137 - 154
  • [2] Employment Intensity of Economic Growth in Southern Europe: Evidence from Multidimensional Panel Data
    Gorkey, Selda
    Tasbasi, Asli
    CROATIAN ECONOMIC SURVEY, 2023, 25 (01) : 5 - 32
  • [3] Determinants and Persistence of Benefits from the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme - Panel Data Analysis for Rajasthan, India
    Jha, Raghbendra
    Gaiha, Raghav
    Pandey, Manoj K.
    Shankar, Shylashri
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH, 2015, 27 (02): : 308 - 329
  • [4] Determinants and Persistence of Benefits from the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme – Panel Data Analysis for Rajasthan, India
    Raghbendra Jha
    Raghav Gaiha
    Manoj K Pandey
    Shylashri Shankar
    The European Journal of Development Research, 2015, 27 : 308 - 329
  • [5] Employment Intensity of Service Sector in India: Trend and Determinants
    Pattanaik, Falguni
    Nayak, Narayan Chandra
    BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH, 2011, 1 : 62 - 66
  • [6] Trends and forecasting of employment intensity of growth in India
    Pattanaik, Falguni
    Nayak, Narayan Chandra
    JOURNAL OF THE ASIA PACIFIC ECONOMY, 2013, 18 (03) : 438 - 459
  • [7] Unions and employment growth: Panel data evidence
    Wooden, M
    Hawke, A
    INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, 2000, 39 (01): : 88 - 107
  • [8] Structure and growth of employment: evidence from India KLEMS data
    Aggarwal, Suresh Chand
    Goldar, Bishwanath
    INDIAN GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, 2019, 12 (02) : 202 - 228
  • [9] Determinants of energy intensity in the European Union: A panel data analysis
    Filipovic, Sanja
    Verbic, Miroslav
    Radovanovic, Mirjana
    ENERGY, 2015, 92 : 547 - 555
  • [10] Determinants of Employment Growth at MNEs: Evidence from Egypt, India, South Africa and Vietnam
    Bhaumik, Sumon
    Estrin, Saul
    Meyer, Klaus
    COMPARATIVE ECONOMIC STUDIES, 2007, 49 (01) : 61 - 80