Wo(men) at work? The impact of cohabiting and married partners' earning on women's work hours

This study investigates the determinants of women's labor supply in the household context. The main focus is on the effect of a change in male partner's wages on women's work hours. This is linked to the broader question of whether married and cohabiting women make different economic decisions and respond differently to changes in their partners' wages. In addition, this study seeks to connect the working behavior of married and cohabiting individuals to the tax-splitting benefit for married couples. To provide a complete picture of working behavior within households, I analyze both women and men using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) from 1993 to 2010. The methodology for the main analysis relies on fixed effects regression. The main estimation results suggest that married women work less on the labor market and further, an increase in partner's wages results in a negative and significant effect on married women's work hours. The marital status of men, on the other hand, has no significant impact on their work hours

The added worker effect differentiated by gender and partnership status: Evidence from involuntary job loss

This paper examines the added worker effect (AWE), which refers to the increase of labor supply of individuals in response to a sudden financial shock in family income, that is, unemployment of their partner. While previous empirical studies focus on married women's response to those shocks, I explicitly analyze the spillover effects of unemployment on both women and men and I also differentiate according to their partnership status (marriage vs. cohabitation). My aim is to evaluate whether intra-household adaptation mechanisms differ by gender and by partnership status. The underlying method is a difference-in-differences setting in combination with an entropy balancing matching procedure. The paper considers plant closures and employer terminations as exogenous forms of unemployment. Using longitudinal data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) study from 1991 through 2013, the empirical investigation finds evidence of the existence of an AWE. The effect is largest when a woman enters unemployment and is mainly driven by changes on the intensive margin (increase of hours)

JRC QSAR Model Database: EURL ECVAM DataBase service on ALternative Methods to animal experimentation: Guideline for Authors and Editors

EURL ECVAM DataBase service on ALternative Methods to animal experimentation In the regulatory assessment of chemicals, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models are playing an increasingly important role in predicting properties needed for hazard and risk assessment. The JRC QSAR Model Database provides information on the validity of QSAR models that have been submitted to the JRC. The database is intended to help to identify valid QSARs, e.g. for the registration and authorisation purposes of chemical substances within the context of REACH Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (EC 1907/2006), a European Union regulation dated 18 December 2006. The QSAR Model Reporting Format (QMRF) is a harmonised template for summarising and reporting key information on QSAR models, including the results of any validation studies. The information is structured according to the OECD principles for the validation of QSAR models.JRC.F.3-Chemicals Safety and Alternative Method

JRC QSAR Model Database: EURL ECVAM DataBase service on ALternative Methods to animal experimentation: To promote the development and uptake of alternative and advanced methods in toxicology and biomedical sciences: SDF - STRUCTURE DATA FORMAT: How to create from SMILES

EURL ECVAM DataBase service on ALternative Methods to animal experimentation To promote the development and uptake of alternative and advanced methods in toxicology and biomedical sciences. This publication is a Tutorial by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide user support. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of this publication.JRC.F.3-Chemicals Safety and Alternative Method

Innovation Indicator 2009: Germany Has Still Some Catching up to Do

On behalf of the Deutsche Telekom Stiftung (Deutsche Telekom Foundation) and the Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrien (Federation of German Industries) DIW Berlin has investigated Germany's innovative capacity for the fifth time in an international comparison. The survey evaluates the ability of countries to create and transform knowledge into marketable products and services (i.e., innovations) using a system of indicators that provides an overall composite indicator of innovative capacity as well as a detailed profile of strengths and weaknesses. Of the seventeen leading industrial nations investigated under the survey Germany only ranked 9th thus remaining in the broad middle range. Relative to its most important competitors Germany looses ground. The US, followed by Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, headed up the list. Germany is particularly successful in its ability to network key participants in the innovation process as well as in international markets of high-technology sectors like mechanical engineering, chemical industry, vehicle manufacturing and medical instruments. Deficiencies in Germany's education and in the financing conditions for innovation and the founding of new companies, plus the regulation of product markets remain the country's greatest innovation system weaknesses.Innovation system, Composite indicator, Industrialized countries

Innovationsindikator 2009: Deutschland hat Aufholbedarf

Das DIW Berlin hat in diesem Jahr zum fünften Mal im Auftrag der Deutschen Telekom Stiftung und des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Industrie (BDI) einen Gesamtindikator für die Innovationsfähigkeit Deutschlands im internationalen Vergleich ermittelt. Dabei wird die Fähigkeit eines Landes, neues Wissen zu schaffen und in neue marktfähige Produkte und Dienstleistungen (Innovationen) umzusetzen, mit einem Indikatorsystem bewertet, das sowohl einen zusammengefassten Gesamtindikator als auch ein detailliertes Stärken-Schwächen-Profil liefert. In einer Gruppe von 17 weltweit führenden Industrieländern landet Deutschland nur auf dem neunten Platz und damit in einem breiten Mittelfeld. Relativ zu seinen wichtigsten Wettbewerbern verliert Deutschland an Boden. An der Spitze stehen die USA, gefolgt von der Schweiz, Schweden, Finnland und Dänemark. Deutschland ist besonders erfolgreich bei der Vernetzung der Innovationsakteure sowie auf den internationalen Märkten der Hochtechnologiebranchen wie Maschinenbau, chemische Industrie, Automobilbau und Medizintechnik. Die größten Schwächen des nationalen Innovationsystems liegen nach wie vor in der Bildung, bei den Finanzierungsbedingungen für Innovationen und Unternehmensgründungen sowie in der Regulierung von Produktmärkten

Innovation Indicator 2009: Germany Has Still Some Catching up to Do

On behalf of the Deutsche Telekom Stiftung (Deutsche Telekom Foundation) and the Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrien (Federation of German Industries) DIW Berlin has investigated Germany's innovative capacity for the fifth time in an international comparison. The survey evaluates the ability of countries to create and transform knowledge into marketable products and services (i.e., innovations) using a system of indicators that provides an overall composite indicator of innovative capacity as well as a detailed profile of strengths and weaknesses. Of the seventeen leading industrial nations investigated under the survey Germany only ranked 9th thus remaining in the broad middle range. Relative to its most important competitors Germany looses ground. The US, followed by Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark, headed up the list. Germany is particularly successful in its ability to network key participants in the innovation process as well as in international markets of high-technology sectors like mechanical engineering, chemical industry, vehicle manufacturing and medical instruments. Deficiencies in Germany's education and in the financing conditions for innovation and the founding of new companies, plus the regulation of product markets remain the country's greatest innovation system weaknesses

Innovationsindikator 2009: Deutschland hat Aufholbedarf

Das DIW Berlin hat in diesem Jahr zum fünften Mal im Auftrag der Deutschen Telekom Stiftung und des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Industrie (BDI) einen Gesamtindikator für die Innovationsfähigkeit Deutschlands im internationalen Vergleich ermittelt. Dabei wird die Fähigkeit eines Landes, neues Wissen zu schaffen und in neue marktfähige Produkte und Dienstleistungen (Innovationen) umzusetzen, mit einem Indikatorsystem bewertet, das sowohl einen zusammengefassten Gesamtindikator als auch ein detailliertes Stärken-Schwächen-Profil liefert. In einer Gruppe von 17 weltweit führenden Industrieländern landet Deutschland nur auf dem neunten Platz und damit in einem breiten Mittelfeld. Relativ zu seinen wichtigsten Wettbewerbern verliert Deutschland an Boden. An der Spitze stehen die USA, gefolgt von der Schweiz, Schweden, Finnland und Dänemark. Deutschland ist besonders erfolgreich bei der Vernetzung der Innovationsakteure sowie auf den internationalen Märkten der Hochtechnologiebranchen wie Maschinenbau, chemische Industrie, Automobilbau und Medizintechnik. Die größten Schwächen des nationalen Innovationsystems liegen nach wie vor in der Bildung, bei den Finanzierungsbedingungen für Innovationen und Unternehmensgründungen sowie in der Regulierung von Produktmärkten.Innovation system, Composite indicator, Industrialized countries

DeepSurveyCam — A Deep Ocean Optical Mapping System

Underwater photogrammetry and in particular systematic visual surveys of the deep sea are by far less developed than similar techniques on land or in space. The main challenges are the rough conditions with extremely high pressure, the accessibility of target areas (container and ship deployment of robust sensors, then diving for hours to the ocean floor), and the limitations of localization technologies (no GPS). The absence of natural light complicates energy budget considerations for deep diving flash-equipped drones. Refraction effects influence geometric image formation considerations with respect to field of view and focus, while attenuation and scattering degrade the radiometric image quality and limit the effective visibility. As an improvement on the stated issues, we present an AUV-based optical system intended for autonomous visual mapping of large areas of the seafloor (square kilometers) in up to 6000 m water depth. We compare it to existing systems and discuss tradeoffs such as resolution vs. mapped area and show results from a recent deployment with 90,000 mapped square meters of deep ocean floor