| Abstract: | 進口競爭對於勞動市場的影響是一個受到學界及大眾關注的議題。傳統上的研究是利用產業資料,而焦點也在勞工薪資及就業上。此一計畫,建立在我過去的研究(Li (2010))基礎之上, 採討進口競爭對於公司訓諫的影響。這一新觀點是重要的,因為公司訓練左右了勞工的一生收入以及工作保障,也和其福利切身相關。在 Li (2010), 我探討了進口競爭在1988至1996年間對美國公司訓諫的影響。在這一計畫,我的研究將延伸到2006. 在Li (2010),我發現了一個有趣的現象: 當面對中低收入國家進口競爭時,美國公司會減少對員工的訓練。這在高科技產業,如IT產業亦復如此。然而,自1996年後,美國的IT產業經歷了大幅度的生產力提升—無論是相對於歷史或同時期其他國家。這讓人不禁問:當產業享受大幅度生產力提升時,廠商對於員工訓練的態度是否會有所不同呢?他們是否會因而更勇於訓練員工,或是仍如以往不情願加以投資呢?這個結果很重要,因為雇主是勞工訓練主要的提供者。我們希望知道面對國際競爭時雇主對於提供訓練的誘因。在此一計畫我也會考慮進口競爭如何影響公司訓練時間長度。這一方面的研究將從1988到2006。訓練時間是重要的,因為越長時間的公司訓練對員工越有助益。此外,雇主對於”是否提供公司訓練”以及”訓練的長度”,也可能有不一樣的態度。加入這第二面向會讓我們對此議題有更全面的了解。
The impact of import competition on the labor market has become an area of great concern for the public and academics. Traditionally, the issue has been studied using industry level data, and the labor market outcomes researchers investigate are usually wage and/or employment. In this project, building on my past work (Li (2010)), I will study the effect of import competition on company training. This new focus on the effects of imports on training is important, since such training is an important factor in earnings and job security, and it has main implications on a worker’s lifetime welfare. In Li (2010), I investigate empirically the effect of import competition on company training in the U.S. between 1988 and 1996. In this project, I will extend the analysis until 2006. In Li (2010), I find an interesting result where import competition from low- or middle-income countries negatively affected the provision of company training in the United States. This is even true when the industry is a “High-Tech” industry such as an IT-related industry. However, since mid-1990s the IT industries experience a “tech boom” in which the U.S. IT industries experience a substantial increase in productivity, relative to both the historical trend and that of other countries. An important question that one might raise, then, is the following: Did the “tech boom” in the late 1990s encourage U.S. IT firms to be more aggressive and become more willing to invest in their workers even in face of rising import competition? Or, as before, although these firms enjoyed increasing value added during the late 1990s, on average they were still reluctant to train workers when facing rising import competition? The results will have important policy implications as employers are the main providers of workers’ training, and we would like to know how international factors affect their incentives to provide such training. In addition, this project will consider how import competition affects the “intensity” of training throughout the period between 1988 and 2006. This further consideration of the duration of training programs is important because we expect a lengthier training to be more useful, and it is possible that while import competition affects the “incidence” of training, its effect on the “duration” of training may not be the same. Adding this second dimension will provide us with a more complete understanding of the issue. |
