open directory as PDF-file
Further information and access to full text (for registered users) are available at EconPapers, EBSCO, JSTOR, WISO and DigiZeitschriften.
Content:
Orginal Articles Dorothee Ihle and Andrea Siebert-Meyerhoff: The Evolution of Immigrants’ Homeownership in Germany JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 155-202.
+ show abstract- hide abstractRecently, the homeownershiprate of immigrants in Germany has increased
by more than 20 percentage points. To shed light on this sharp rise, this paper
investigates the driving forces of the trend in the homeownership rate of immigrant
households in Germany between 1996 to 2005 and 2001 to 2011 using a probit-based
non-linear decomposition method. Empirical findings suggest that 50% of the change
in immigrants’ homeownership rate within the first time period can be explained by
characteristics such as age and educational attainment. In the second time period, the
explanatory power of characteristics is almost zero, indicating that it is rather the
favorable economic and institutional environment as well as changes in immigrants’
tenure choice process that contributed to the substantial increase in immigrants’
homeownership rate in Germany. We additionally find that housing quality of immigrant homeowners has slightly improved as well, but that there is still a substantial
nativity gap in housing quality among tenants as well as among owners. Jörg Döpke, Ulrich Fritsche and Gabi Waldhof: Theories, Techniques and the Formation of German Business Cycle Forecasts JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 203-242.
+ show abstract- hide abstractWe report results of a survey among active forecasters of the German
business cycle. Using data for 82 respondents from 37 different institutions, we
investigate what models and theories forecasters subscribe to and find that they
are pronounced conservative in the sense that they overwhelmingly rely on
methods and theories that have been well-established for a long time, while
more recent approaches are relatively unimportant for the practice of business
cycle forecasting. DSGE models are mostly used in public institutions. In line
with findings in the literature there are tendencies of “leaning towards consensus” (especially for public institutions) and “sticky adjustment of forecasts” with
regard to new information. A stable relationship between preferred theories and
methods and forecast accuracy cannot be established. Matthias Dütsch, Ralf Himmelreicher and Clemens Ohlert: Calculating Gross Hourly Wages – the (Structure of) Earnings Survey and the German Socio-Economic Panel in Comparison JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 243-276.
+ show abstract- hide abstractThe statutory minimum wage in Germany was set as an hourly wage.
Thus, valid information on gross hourly wages must be calculated from
monthly wages and weekly working hours. This paper compares the German
Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) and the (Structure of) Earnings Survey (SES/
ES). The sampling and collection of data on employees in the household
survey GSOEP, and on jobs in the administrative surveys SES/ES exhibit
fundamental conceptual differences. Accordingly, there is variation in the
definition of types of employment and in the distribution of the observed
units regarding central characteristics. Monthly wages, weekly working hours
and gross hourly wages differ especially in the lower range of the respective
distribution. Against this backdrop specific implications can be derived for
minimum wage research. Martin Biewen and Daniela Plötze: The Role of Hours Changes for the Increase in German Earnings Inequality JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 277-304.
+ show abstract- hide abstractUsing data from the German Structure of Earnings Survey (GSES), this
paper studies the role of changes in working hours for the increase in male
and female earnings inequality between 2001 and 2010. We provide both classic decompositions of the variance of log earnings into the variances of hours,
wage rates and their covariance, and decompositions based on reweighting the
conditional hours distribution. Depending on the inequality measure considered,
our results suggest that between 10 and 30% of the increase in male earnings
inequality and 37 to 47% of the increase in female earnings inequality can be
explained by changes in working hours. In addition, a large part of the inequality
increase can be accounted for by changes in the composition of person and firm
characteristics.
Book Reviews Martin Peitz: Julian Dörr, Nils Goldschmidt und Frank Schorkopf (eds.), Share Economy: Institutionelle Grundlagen und gesellschaftspolitische Rahmenbedingungen JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 305-308.
Dirk Sauerland: Caspari, Volker Hrsg. (2018) Kontinuität und Wandel in der Institutionenökonomie, Studien zur Entwicklung der ökonomischen Theorie XXXIII, Schriften des Vereins für Socialpolitik, Bd. 115/XXXIII JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 309-312.
Friedrun Quaas and Georg Quaas: Lucas, Rainer, Reinhard Pfriem, Claus Thomasberger (Hrsg.), Auf der Suche nach dem Ökonomischen – Karl Marx zum 200 JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 313-318.
Data Observer Manfred Antoni and Rainer Schnell: The Past, Present and Future of the German Record Linkage Center (GRLC) JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 319-332.
Heiko Stüber and Stefan Seth: The Public Release Data of the Administrative Wage and Labor Market Flow Panel JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 333-344.
Jan Goebel, Markus M. Grabka, Stefan Liebig, Martin Kroh, David Richter, Carsten Schröder and Jürgen Schupp: The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) JBNST - Vol. 239/2 - 2019, pp. 345-360.
|