Empirical Economics

, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp 1519–1543 | Cite as

How well does a dynamic Mincer equation fit NLSY data? Evidence based on a simple wage-bargaining model

  • Corrado AndiniEmail author


This article argues that a dynamic Mincer equation can be seen as the solution of a simple wage-bargaining model between a worker and an employer where the unemployment-benefit level, affecting the outside option of the worker, depends on past wages. Further, it shows that this model provides a good fit of the US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth data. The evidence is robust to a number of sensitivity checks.


Mincer equation Wages Human capital Bargaining 

JEL Classification

I21 J31 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson TW, Hsiao C (1981) Estimation of dynamic models with error components. J Am Stat Assoc 76(375): 598–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andini C (2007) Returns to education and wage equations: a dynamic approach. Appl Econ Lett 14(8): 577–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andini C (2009) How fast do wages adjust to human-capital productivity? Dynamic panel-data evidence from Belgium, Denmark and Finland. IZA Discussion Papers, no 4583, Institute for the Study of Labor, BonnGoogle Scholar
  4. Andini C (2010) A dynamic Mincer equation with an application to Portuguese data. Appl Econ 42(16): 2091–2098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arellano M, Bond SR (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58(2): 277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arellano M, Bover O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. J Econom 68(1): 29–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnow BS, Cain GG, Goldberger A (1981) Selection on observables. Eval Stud Rev Annu 5: 43–59Google Scholar
  8. Belzil C (2007) Testing the specification of the Mincer equation. IZA Discussion Papers, no 2650, Institute for the Study of Labor, BonnGoogle Scholar
  9. Blundell RW, Bond SR (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J Econom 87(1): 115–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blundell RW, Bond SR (2000) GMM estimation with persistent panel data: an application to production functions. Econom Rev 19(3): 321–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bond SR (2002) Dynamic panel data models: a guide to micro data methods and practice. Portuguese Econ J 1(2): 141–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Card D (1999) The causal effect of education on earnings. In: Ashenfelter O, Card D (eds) Handbook of labor economics. North-Holland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Chéron A, Langot F (2010) On-the-job search equilibrium with endogenous unemployment benefits. Labour Econ 17(2): 383–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dalmazzo A (1992) Outside options in a bargaining model with decay in the size of the cake. Econ Lett 40(4): 417–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dalmazzo A (1995) Bargaining power and wage determination: the role of outside options. Labour 9(1): 121–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flannery MJ, Rangan KP (2006) Partial adjustment toward target capital structures. J Financ Econ 79(3): 469–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Galvão AF (2011) Quantile regression for dynamic panel data with fixed effects. J Econom 164(1): 142–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guvenen F (2009) An empirical investigation of labor income processes. Rev Econ Dyn 12(1): 58–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heckman JJ, Lochner LJ, Todd PE (2003) Fifty years of Mincer earnings regressions. NBER Working Papers, no 9732, National Bureau of Economic Research, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Heer B (2006) Should unemployment benefits be related to previous earnings. FinanzArchiv 62(4): 530–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kohn J, Averett S (2010a) Endogenous dummy variables in a dynamic panel data model with an application to the effect of marriage on health. Working paper, Oct 2010. Accessed 25 March 2012
  22. Kohn J, Averett S (2010b) Can’t we just live together? New evidence on the effect of relationship status on health. Working paper, Oct 2010. Accessed 25 March 2012
  23. Lemieux T (2006) The ‘Mincer equation’ thirty years after schooling, experience, and earnings. In: Grossbard S (ed) Jacob Mincer: a pioneer of modern labor economics. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Ljungqvist L, Sargent T (1998) The European unemployment dilemma. J Polit Econ 106(3): 514–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mayer G (2004) Union membership trends in the United States. Federal Publications, Paper 174. Accessed 25 March 2012
  26. Mincer J (1974) Schooling, experience, and earnings. National Bureau of Economic Research, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Murphy KM, Welch F (1990) Empirical age-earnings profiles. J Labor Econ 8(2): 202–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pereira PT, Martins PS (2004) Returns to education and wage equations. Appl Econ 36(6): 525–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polachek SW (2007) Earnings over the lifecycle: the Mincer earnings function and its applications. IZA Discussion Papers, no 3181, Institute for the Study of Labor, BonnGoogle Scholar
  30. Roodman D (2006) How to do xtabond2: an introduction to “difference” and “system” GMM in Stata. CGD Working Papers, no 103, Centre for Global Development, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  31. Roodman D (2009) A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 71(1): 135–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rubinstein A (1982) Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica 50(1): 97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taylor JB (1999) Staggered price and wage setting in macroeconomics. In: Taylor JB, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of macroeconomics. North Holland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Trostel PA (2005) Nonlinearity in the return to education. J Appl Econ 8(1): 191–202Google Scholar
  35. Vella F, Verbeek M (1998) Whose wages do unions raise? A dynamic model of unionism and wage rate determination for young men. J Appl Econ 13(2): 163–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wandner S (2008) Employment programs for recipients of unemployment insurance. Mon Labor Rev 131(10): 17–27Google Scholar
  37. Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  38. Wooldridge JM (2005) Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved effects. J Appl Econom 20(1): 39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Gestão e EconomiaUniversidade da MadeiraFunchalPortugal
  2. 2.Centro de Estudos de Economia Aplicada do Atlântico (CEEAplA)Ponta DelgadaPortugal
  3. 3.Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)BonnGermany

Personalised recommendations