The OECD Beveridge Curve: technological progress, globalisation and institutional factors


This paper tests the existence of a Beveridge Curve across the economies of nineteen OECD countries from 1980 to 2007, investigating the impact of technological progress and globalisation on the unemployment-vacancies trade-off. We find largely favourable evidence for the existence of a OECD Beveridge Curve. Lagged values of technological progress (R&D intensity) shift the Curve outwards, producing evidence in support of the creative destruction effect. Lagged values of a globalisation index also shift the Curve outwards, worsening the unemployment-vacancies trade-off. On the other hand, capital per worker shifts the Curve inwards both in the short and in the long run. Significant institutional variables include coordination bargaining, and, less consistently, unemployment benefits or employment protection. Including in the Curve structural indicators (such as technological progress and globalisation) as well as institutional variables is needed to obtain a satisfactory specification.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    This point is dealt at length in Destefanis and Fonseca (2004). See also Entorf (2003).

  2. 2.

    See for example IMF (1996) and OECD (1997).

  3. 3.

    See also Nickell and Layard (1999) and Booth et al. (2000).

  4. 4.

    Here too there is of course some heterogeneity. Globalisation increases a lot for Austria and Spain; technological progress increases briskly in Japan and at a slightly slower pace in Austria, Belgium and Portugal.

  5. 5.

    Under error homoscedasticity, the structure of the first-difference model ensures that an asymptotically equivalent estimator can be obtained in one step. Moreover, simulations suggest very small efficiency gains from using the two-step model, even in the presence of sizeable heteroscedasticity, and a high dependence of the two-step weight matrix on estimated parameters. Hence we adopt a one-step approach throughout this paper.

  6. 6.

    Too many instruments can overfit endogenous variables and fail to expunge their endogenous components. Thus, we have to beware of taking comfort in a Hansen test p-value below 0.1, whereas higher values, such as 0.25, may represent a problem.

  7. 7.

    We are indebted to an anonymous referee for pointing out this possibility to us.


  1. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1994). Growth and unemployment. Review of Economic Studies, 61, 477–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allard, G. (2005a). Measuring job security over time: In Search of a Historical Indicator, Instituto de Empresa Working Paper, WP 05-17.

  3. Allard, G. (2005b). Measuring The Changing Generosity Of Unemployment Benefits: Beyond Existing Indicators, Instituto de Empresa Working Paper, WP 05-18.

  4. Arpaia, A., Curci, N. (2010). EU labour market behavior during the Great Recession, EU Economic Papers, no. 405.

  5. Blundell, R., Bond, S. R., Windmeijer, F. (2001). Estimation in dynamic panel data models: improving on the performance of the standard GMM estimator. In T. B. Fomby, R. Carter Hill, Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration, (Advances in Econometrics, Volume 15), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 53–91.

  6. Booth, A., Burda, M., Calmfors, L., Checchi, D., Naylor, R., & Visser, J. (2000). What do Unions do in Europe? A report. Milan: Fondazione Rodolfo DeBenedetti.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Destefanis, S., Fonseca, R. (2004). Un nuovo approccio alla misura del mismatch: la funzione di produzione. In A. Mocavini and A. Paliotta (Eds.) La domanda di lavoro qualificato in Italia, Franco Angeli, Milan, 234–255.

  8. Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied Economics, 38(10), 1091–1110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Entorf, H. (2003). Do aggregate measures of mismatch measure mismatch? A time series analysis of existing concepts. EconWPA: Labor and Demography.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harrigan, J. (1997). Technology, factor supplies and international specialization: estimating the neoclassical model. American Economic Review, 87, 475–494.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hobijn, B., & Şahin, A. (2013). Beveridge curve shifts across countries since the Great Recession. IMF Economic Review, 61(4), 566–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. ICFTU, (1996). The Global Market: Trade Unionism’s Great Challenge, ICFTU 16th World Congress, Brussels.

  13. IMF, (1996). The impact of globalisation on workers and their trade unions.

  14. ISTAT, MARSS Database,

  15. Judson, R. A., & Owen, L. A. (1999). Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists. Economics Letters, 65(1), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Koeniger, W., Leonardi, M., & Nunziata, L. (2007). Labour market institutions and wage inequality. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 60(3), 340–356.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Layard, R., Nickell, S., Jackman, R. (1991). Unemployment: macroeconomic performance and the labour market, Oxford University Press.

  18. Mortensen, D. T., & Pissarides, C. A. (1998). Technological progress, job creation and job destruction. Review of Economic Dynamics, 1, 733–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nickell, W. (2006). The CEP-OECD Institutions Data Set (1960–2004), Discussion Paper no.759, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, November.

  20. Nickell, S., & Bell, B. (1995). The collapse in demand for the unskilled and unemployment across the OECD. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 11, 40–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nickell, S., Layard, R. (1999). Labour market institutions and economic performance. In O. Ashenfelter, C. Card (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 3 (Amsterdam: North Holland).

  22. Nickell, S., Nunziata, L. (2001). Labour market institutions database. (attached to CEP discussion paper no. 0502).

  23. Nickell, S., Nunziata, L., Ochel, W., & Quintini, G. (2003). The Beveridge Curve, Unemployment and Wages in the OECD from the 1960s to the, 1990s. In P. Aghion, R. Frydman, J. Stiglitz, & M. Woodford (Eds.), Knowledge, information and expectations in Modern Macroeconomics: in honour of Edmund S. Phelps (pp. 394–431). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. OECD (1997). Implementing the OECD jobs strategy: member countries’ experience.

  25. OECD (2004). Wage-setting Institutions and Outcomes, Employment Outlook, Chapter 3.

  26. OECD (various years). Analytical Database.

  27. OECD (various years). Database on unemployment by duration.

  28. OECD (various years). International trade by commodity statistics.

  29. OECD (various years). STAN bilateral trade database.

  30. OECD (various years). STAN database for industrial analysis.

  31. OECD (2009). Main economic indicators.

  32. OECD (2009). Unit Labour Costs Dataset.

  33. OECD various years. Labour market statistics database.

  34. OECD. Stat Extracts,

  35. Pissarides, C. A. (1990). Equilibrium unemployment theory (1st ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pissarides, C. A., & Vallanti, G. (2007). The impact of TFP growth on steady-state unemployment. International Economic Review, 48(2), 607–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Postel-Vinay, F. (2002). The dynamic of technological unemployment. International Economic Review, 43, 737–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Roodman, D. (2009a). How to do Xtabond2: an introduction to difference and system GMM in stata. Stata Journal, 9(1), 86–136.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Roodman, D. (2009b). A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 71(1), 135–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Song, L. L., & Webster, E. (2003). How segmented Are skilled and unskilled labour markets? The case of Beveridge curves. Australian Economic Papers, 42, 332–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Soto, M. (2007). System GMM estimation with a small number of individuals, Institute for Economic Analysis, Barcelona, Mimeo.

  42. Thorpe, V. (1997). Globalisation and Social Policy, Draft ICEM Position Paper.

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Destefanis.



Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Destefanis, S., Mastromatteo, G. The OECD Beveridge Curve: technological progress, globalisation and institutional factors. Eurasian Bus Rev 5, 151–172 (2015).

Download citation


  • Unemployment
  • Vacancies
  • Capitalisation effect
  • Creative destruction
  • Labour-market institutions