Identification of regional labor factors of influence on costs for innovation of enterprises in the region

Volume 3, Issue 4
Pages: 243—250

A. N. Kozlovskaya —
Ural Federal University (Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation)
E. E. Rukhman — Ural Federal University (Yekaterinburg, Russian Federation)

Download full text

In this paper, we examined the impact of labor loyalty and the labor market situation on the costs of companies in the region on research and development. In the work was carried out the analysis of existing articles and papers on related topics. First of all, it was our task to determine the mathematical model of the concept of loyalty of the workforce, to determine from which economic indicators it can be identified. We have identified and justified the hypothesis that the loyalty of the workforce is the ratio of the following indicators: the number of unemployed and the number of free work places. In the case of such a definition of loyalty, it was important to take the indicators for one group of workers (with the same qualification) to exclude the effects of structural unemployment. So coming to understand the factors on which the loyalty of the labor force in the region is based, we included them in our model to try to establish some relationship between the above variables and the desire of employers to invest in R & D. Based on the analyzed data and the results of testing using econometric methods, the dependence of investments in innovation and labor loyalty in the regions of Russia was proved in this paper. A direct dependence was established that indicates a decrease in loyalty to the employer increases the motivation of the last one to invest in innovation.

Keywords: unemployment, R & D, need for labor, employment protection, innovations, employment protection legislation

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2017.3.3.026

References

  1. Pierre, G., and S. Scarpetta (2004): Employment Regulations Through the Eyes of Employers: Do They Matter and How Do Firms Respond to Them?, IZA Discussion Papers 1424, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  2. Acharya, V.V., Baghai, R.P., Subramanian, K.V.,( 2014). Wrongful discharge laws and innovation. Financ. Stud. 27 (1), 301–346.
  3. Koeniger, W., (2005). Dismissal costs and innovation. Econ. Lett., 79–84.
  4. Booth, A. L., & Zoega, G. (2003). On the welfare implications of firing costs. European Journal of Political Economy, 19(4), 759-775.
  5. Wasmer, E., (2006). General versus specific skills in labor markets with search frictions and firing costs. Econ. Rev. 96 (3), 811–831.
  6. Autor, D., Kerr, W., Kugler, A., (2007). Does employment protection reduce productivity? Evidence from US States. Econ. J. 117, 189–217.
  7. Autor, D. H., Donohue III, J. J., & Schwab, S. J. (2006). The costs of wrongful-discharge laws. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2), 211-231.
  8. Olley, G.S., Pakes, A., (1996). The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica 64 (6), 1263–1297.
  9. Disney, R., Haskel, J., Heden, Y., 2003. Restructuring and productivity growth in UK manufacturing. J. 113 (489), 666–694.
  10. Baldwin, J., Gu, W., (2006). Plant turnover and productivity growth in Canadian manufacturing. Corp. Change 15 (3), 417–465.
  11. Bartelsman, E., Haltiwanger, J., & Scarpetta, S. (2009). Measuring and analyzing cross-country differences in firm dynamics. In Producer dynamics: New evidence from micro data (pp. 15-76). University of Chicago Press.
  12. Bertola, G., 1994. Flexibility, investment, and growth. J. Monet. Econ. 34, 215–238.
  13. Kessing, S. G. (2006). Employment protection and product market competition. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 108(2), 339-352.