Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/46194 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2010
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 5262
Publisher: 
Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
Many microeconometric models of discrete labour supply include alternative-specific constants meant to account for (possibly besides other factors) the density or accessibility of particular types of jobs (e.g. part-time jobs vs. full-time jobs). The most common use of these models is the simulation of tax-transfer reforms. The simulation is usually interpreted as a comparative static exercise, i.e. the comparison of different equilibria induced by different policy regimes. The simulation procedure, however, typically keeps fixed the estimated alternative-specific constants. In this note we argue that this procedure is not consistent with the comparative statics interpretation. Equilibrium means that the number of people willing to work on the various job types must be equal to the number of available jobs. Since the constants reflect the number of jobs and since the number of people willing to work change as a response to the change in tax-transfer regime, it follows that the constants should also change. A structural interpretation of the alternative-specific constants leads to the development of a simulation procedure consistent with the comparative static interpretation. The procedure is illustrated with an empirical example.
Subjects: 
random utility
discrete choice
labour supply
simulation of tax reforms
alternative-specific constants
equilibrium simulation
JEL: 
C35
C53
H31
J22
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
132.74 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.