Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Urban Effects on Participation and Wages: Are there Gender Differences

By Euan Phimister


This paper estimates participation and wage equations using panel data from the United Kingdom to explore gender differences in urban wage and participation premiums. The results suggest a small but economically significant urban participation premium for women but none for men. Results from the wage estimations suggest that after controlling for sample selectivity, observed and unobserved heterogeneity, the urban premium is larger for women. This wage premium is also larger for married or cohabiting women relative to others. There is also evidence of higher urban returns to experience for men and lower urban wage depreciation for both men and women

Topics: Participation, wages, urban, rural, panel, sample selection
Publisher: University of Aberdeen Business School
Year: 2004
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (1991). A Comparison of Two-stage Estimators of Censored Regression Models, doi
  2. (1998). Are Cities Dying, doi
  3. (1994). Changing linkages between work and poverty in Rural America, doi
  4. (2001). Cities and Skills, doi
  5. (1992). Compensating Wage Differentials and Unobserved Productivity, doi
  6. (1995). Early-Career Work Experience and Gender Wage Differentials, doi
  7. (1998). Estimating Models with Sample Selection Bias: A Survey, doi
  8. (1991). Geography and Trade, doi
  9. (1981). Heterogeneity and state dependence, in: S.Rosen (Ed.) Studies in Labor Markets,
  10. (1982). Interrupted work careers: Depreciation and Restoration of Human Capital, doi
  11. (1995). Labour markets and employment opportunities in rural Britain Sociologia Ruralis, doi
  12. (1999). Learning in Cities, doi
  13. (1990). Matching and agglomeration economies in a system of cities, doi
  14. (1992). Nonresponse in panel data: The impact on estimates of a life cycle consumption function, doi
  15. (1998). On the precipice of reform: welfare spell durations for rural female headed families, doi
  16. (1984). Panel Data, in: Z.Griliches and Intriligator (Eds.),
  17. (1993). Productivity Gains from Geographic Concentration of Human Capital: Evidence from the Cities, doi
  18. (1999). Race and Gender in the Labor Market, in: doi
  19. (1999). Rural America: a challenge to regional scientists, doi
  20. (1999). Rural Economies. Report of the Performance and Innovation Unit.
  21. (2001). Sorting and Urban Agglomeration, doi
  22. (1999). State dependence, serial correlation and heterogeneity in intertemporal labor force participation of married women, doi
  23. (1992). Testing for selectivity bias in panel data models, doi
  24. (1989). The Covariance Structure of Earnings and Hours Changes, doi
  25. (1993). The Economy and Rural England, Rural Development Commission,
  26. (2000). The Evolution of Individual Male Earnings in Great Britain: 1975-95, doi
  27. (2000). The Heckman Correction for Sample Selection and its Critique, doi
  28. (1981). The incidental parameters problem and the problem of initial conditions in estimating a discrete-time-discrete-data stochastic process, in:
  29. (1990). The Wage Effects of Residential Location and Commuting Constraints on Employed Married-women, doi
  30. (1997). Towards a development strategy for Rural Scotland. A discussion paper. Scottish Office,
  31. (1999). Two-step estimation of panel data models with censored endogenous variables and selection bias, doi
  32. (2000). Unemployment persistence, doi
  33. (2002). Urban wages and labor market agglomeration, doi
  34. (1982). Wages, Rents, and the Quality of Life, doi
  35. (1978). Why Women earn less: The Theory and Estimation of Differential Overqualification,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.