2013
DOI: 10.3790/schm.133.4.477
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does the Use of Worker Flows Improve the Analysis of Establishment Turnover? Evidence from German Administrative Data

Abstract: Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
25
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
(12 reference statements)
1
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…9 Note that Equation (5) does not contain individual-level controls because all variables on individual level are time-invariant (e.g., education, gender, and nationality) and, hence, are absorbed by the individual fixed effects. 10 We address the issue of changing firm identifiers by means of the approach proposed by Hethey-Maier and Schmieder (2013). Fackler, Schnabel, and Wagner (2013) and Fackler and Schnabel (2015) provide an overview of the characteristics of closing firms.…”
Section: Identification Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9 Note that Equation (5) does not contain individual-level controls because all variables on individual level are time-invariant (e.g., education, gender, and nationality) and, hence, are absorbed by the individual fixed effects. 10 We address the issue of changing firm identifiers by means of the approach proposed by Hethey-Maier and Schmieder (2013). Fackler, Schnabel, and Wagner (2013) and Fackler and Schnabel (2015) provide an overview of the characteristics of closing firms.…”
Section: Identification Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Panels B, C, and D, shops are categorized as large if their maximum shop size before the deregulation is above the median, which is six employees. In Panel D, we include only large shops that survive or are classified as “atomized death” according to Hethey‐Maier and Schmieder's () procedure. Source : Establishment History Panel.…”
Section: The Deregulation's Employment Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A plant id does not allow any inference on whether the plant belongs to a larger firm. An issue that is discussed in length byHethey-Maier and Schmieder (2010) is that the disappearance of a plant id might reflect either a plant closure or a restructuring within a larger firm. The same might apply to changes of the plant size.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%