The Estimation of Urban Premium Wage Using Propensity Score Analysis: Some Considerations from the Spatial Perspective

  • Dusan Paredes
  • Marcelo Lufin
  • Patricio Aroca
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


The urban economics literature supports that thick labor markets pay higher wage levels than thin labor markets. Glaeser and Mare (2001) estimate the elasticity wage-city size larger than one million inhabitants around of 36 % higher than smaller areas, while Glaeser and Messenger (2010) identify a elasticity of 45 % for the case of skilled workers. This positive relation also exists within industries, but with an uneven impact (Elvery 2010). In spite of the extensive empirical evidence, the most of the applications have been focused on North American, European and Asian contexts. In this chapter we extend the analysis toward the Latin American case, where the ONU-Wider has strongly recommended focusing on “increasing inequalities partly as a consequence of the uneven impact of trade openness and globalization” (Kanbur et al. 2005). We use the Chilean case and provide a first estimation of wage differentials between thick and thin labor markets. Although the extension toward new contexts could be considered a contribution as itself, the particular scenario of Latin American realities must be discussed.


Labor Market Wage Differential Metropolitan Region Administrative Division Wage Premium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anselin L (1995) Local indicators of spatial association – LISA. Geogr Anal 27:93–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnow BS, Cain GG, Goldberger AS (1980) Issues in the analysis of selectivity bias. In: Stromsdorfer EW, Farkas G (eds) Evaluation studies: review annual, vol 5. Sage Publication, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry C, Glaeser E (2005) The divergence of human capital levels across cities. NBER working papers 11617. National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonacich P (1972) Factoring and weighing approaches to clique identification. J Math Sociol 2:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boots B, Kanaroglou P (1988) Incorporating the effects of spatial structure in discrete choice models of migration. J Reg Sci 28:495–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boots B, Tiefelsdorf M (2000) Global and local spatial autocorrelation in bounded regular tessellations. J Geogr Syst 2(4):319–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boots BN (1984) Evaluating principal eigenvalues as measures of network structure. Geogr Anal 16:270–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borgatti S (2005) Centrality and network flow. Soc Networks 27(1):55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castells M (2006) The theory of the network society. MPG Books, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. CASEN (2009) Encuesta de Caracterizacion Socio Economica NacionalGoogle Scholar
  11. Combes P, Duranton G, Gobillon L (2008) Spatial wage disparities: sorting matters! J Urban Econ 63:732–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elvery J (2010) City size and skill intensity. Reg Sci Urban Econ 40(6):367–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fruchterman T, Reingold E (1991) Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Softw Pract Exp 21(11):1129–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gastner M, Newman M (2004) Diffusion-based method for producing density-equalizing. PNAS 101(20):7499–7504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Getis A, Griffith D (2002) Comparative spatial filtering in regression analysis. Geogr Anal 34(2):130–140Google Scholar
  16. Glaeser E, Mare D (2001) Cities and skills. J Labor Econ 19(2):316–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glaeser E, Resseger M (2009) The complementarity between cities and skills. NBER working papers 15103, National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  18. Green N (2007) Functional polycentricity: a formal definition in terms of social network analysis. Urban Stud 44:2077–2103. doi: 10.1080/00420980701518941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heckman J (2005) Lessons from the technology of skill formation. NBER working papers 11142, National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  20. Holland P (1986) Statistics and causal inference. J Am Stat Assoc 81:945–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Iacus S, King G, Porro G (2008) Matching for causal inference without balance checking. UNIMI - research papers in economics, business, and statistics unimi-1073, UniversitádegliStudi di MilanoGoogle Scholar
  22. Iacus SM, King G, Porro G (2011) Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. J Am Stat Assoc 106(493):345–361. doi: 10.1198/jasa.2011.tm09599 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Imbens G (2004) Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Rev Econ Stat 86(1):4–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kanbur R, Venables A (2005) Spatial inequality and development overview of unu-wider project.
  25. Kanbur R, López-Calva LF, Venables AJ (2005) Symposium on spatial inequality in Latin America. Cuadernos de economía 42(125):133–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lechner M (1999) Nonparametric bounds on employment and income effects of continuous vocational training in East Germany. Econ J 2(1):1–28Google Scholar
  27. Marshall A (1920) Principles of economics. MacMillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Mion G, Naticchioni P (2009) The spatial sorting and matching of skills and firms. Can J Econ 42(1):28–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Puga D (1998) Urbanisation patterns: European vs. less developed countries. J Reg Sci 38:231–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Puga D (1999) The rise and fall of regional inequalities. Eur Econ Rev 43(2):303–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rosenthal S, Strange W (2004) Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies. In: Henderson J, Thisse J (eds) Handbook of regional and urban economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 2120–2171Google Scholar
  33. Rubin DB (1986) Which ifs have causal answers. J Am Stat Assoc 81:961–962Google Scholar
  34. Venables A (2005) Spatial disparities in developing countries: cities, regions and international trade. Int Econ Rev 5:3–21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Economia, Departamento de EconomiaUniversidad Católica del NorteAntofagastaChile

Personalised recommendations