Abstract. This work aims to study regional wage differentials from both a static and a dynamic perspective. The usual Blinder and Oaxaca static decomposition does not provide clear information about the factors which explain changes in regional wage differentials over the years. To overcome this problem the Juhn, Murphy and Pierce decomposition is employed. The paper analyses the case of Portugal for 1995 and 2002. The results show that, although the changes in the interregional wage inequality were small, they were caused by important and counteracting factors.JEL classification: J31, J38, J49

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

No abstract

Abstract. Unlike previous studies, in this paper we estimate the contribution of covariates for the regional wage decomposition components along the wage distribution employing a method first described in 2009 by S Firpo, N Fortin, and T Lemieu (Econometrica 77 953-973). We consider the case of Portugal, a country with persistent and large regional wage gaps. We find that education, occupation, and firm size are the most important factors in explaining the growing importance of the composition effect. The wage structure effect, in turn, is mainly determined by differences in reward for experience and tenure. Moreover, we conclude that the importance of these covariates for both effects is not equal along the wage distribution.

Empirical evidence on productivity differences between family owned and nonfamily owned firms is still sparse and reveals conflicting results. Unlike previous studies, we analyse the effect of the firm's life cycle on productivity using a large sample of nonlisted firms. Furthermore, we consider a model with heterogeneity of inputs between the two types of firms and addressing possible endogeneity problems. We conclude that there are no significant differences in productivity between family and non-family firms, for both startup/growth and mature stages of life cycle. Furthermore, labour seems to be the main determinant of family firms' productivity, which is especially evident for firms in the mature stage.