Journal of Labour Economics (노동경제논집)

The Korean Labor Economic Association (한국노동경제학회)
권호 표지

Comparison of the Effects of Government Subsidies on Labor Productivity Improvement

정부 보조금의 노동생산성 향상 효과 비교

  • Received : 2020.03.23
  • Accepted : 2020.05.07
  • Published : 2020.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper analyzes and compares the effects of various government subsidies to improve labor productivity. Laborers are differentiated in learning ability, and duopsonists in the labor market sequentially determine the quality levels and wages of employed laborers in a two-stage noncooperative game under perfect information. If a subsidy is given to the advanced firm in quality and productivity of labor, that firm will prefer to intensify wage competition due to strengthening its competitiveness in the labor market, and attempt to lower its quality in order to reduce the degree of differentiation in quality. At that time, the other firm wants to avoid competition because of its weakened competitiveness, and may have an incentive to lower the quality level to expand the differentiation. If the government subsidizes low-quality and low-productivity firm, it is motivated to increase its quality level to reduce differentiation due to the strengthening of competitiveness, and its competitor has an incentive to improve the quality to expand the differentiation. And there is no significant difference in whether payments are made to laborers or firms.

본 연구는 노동생산성 향상을 위해 다양한 방식으로 지급할 수 있는 정부 보조금의 효과를 분석하여 비교한다. 노동자들은 학습 능력에 차별화된 분포를 하고, 수요복점의 각 기업은 투입하는 노동의 질적 수준과 임금 수준을 완전정보 하의 두 단계 비협조게임 모형을 통해 순차적으로 결정한다. 이때 질적 수준 및 생산성 측면에서 앞서 있는 기업에 유리하도록 보조금을 지급하면, 이 기업은 노동시장에서의 경쟁력 강화로 임금경쟁 심화를 선호하게 되어, 차별화 정도의 축소를 위해 질적 수준 저하를 시도하고, 상대방 기업은 경쟁력 약화로 경쟁 회피를 위해 차별화를 확대하려고 역시 질적 수준을 낮추려는 유인을 가질 수 있다. 반대로 정부가 낮은 질적 수준이나 저생산성의 기업을 지원하면, 경쟁력 강화로 부터 심화한 임금경쟁을 하기 위해, 차별화 축소의 목적으로 질적 수준을 높일 동기를 갖게 되며, 상대 기업은 차별화 확대를 위한 질적 수준 향상의 유인이 있다. 그리고 지급 대상이 노동자인지 기업인지에 따라 결과에 유의미한 차이는 발생하지 않는다.

Keywords

References

  1. 기획재정부. 시사경제용어사전 (2017). https://terms.naver.com/entry.nhn?docId=299438&cid=43665&categoryId=43665.
  2. 하준경. "교육비 보조의 경제성장 효과 : 선별적 지원과 보편적 지원의 비교," 정보사회과학연구 (2016): 215-238.
  3. An, Y.M. "Logconcavity Versus Logconvexity: a Complete Characterization." Journal of Economic Theory 80 (1998) : 350-369. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeth.1998.2400
  4. Benassi, C., Chirco, A., and Colombo, C. "A Model Of Monopolistic Competition With Personal income Dispersion." Metroeconomica 56(3) (2005) : 305-317. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-999X.2005.00218.x
  5. Benassi, C., Chirco, A., and Colombo, C. "Vertical Differentiation and the Distribution of Income." Bulletine of Economic Research 58 (2006) : 345-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0307-3378.2006.00249.x
  6. Benassi, C., Chirco, A., and Colombo, C. "Vertical Differentiation Beyond the Uniform Distribution." Journal of Economics 58 (2018) : 11-28.
  7. Bertoletti, P. and Etro, F. "Monopolistic Competition When Income Matters." Economic Journal 127 (2017) : 1217-1243. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12329
  8. Bonnisseau, J.M. and Lahmandi-Ayed, R. "Vertical Differentiation With Non-uniform Consumer's Distribution." International Journal of Economic Theory 3 (2007) :179-190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-7363.2007.00054.x
  9. Delgado, M.S., Henderson D.J., Parmeter, C.F. "Does Education Matter for Economic Growth?." Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics (2014) : 334-359. https://doi.org/10.1111/obes.12025
  10. Dixit, A. and Stiglitz, J. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity." American Economic Journal 67(3) (1977) : 297-308.
  11. Gabszewicz, J.J. and Thisse, J.F. "Price Competition, Quality and Income Disparities." Journal of Economic Theory 20 (1979) : 340-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(79)90041-3
  12. Gabszewicz, J.J. and Thisse, J.F. "Entry (and Exit) In a Differentiated Industry." Journal of Economic Theory 22 (1980) : 327-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(80)90046-0
  13. Hotelling, H. "Stability in Competition." Economic Journal 39 (1929) : 49-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/2224214
  14. Johnson L.J., Kotz S.K., and Balakrishnan N. Continuous Univariate Distributions. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, Vol. 2. (1995).
  15. Selten, R. "Re-examination of the Perfectness Concept for Equilibrium Points in Extensive Games." International Journal of Game Theory 4 (1975) : 22-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01766400
  16. Seo, C. "The Government Subsidy for Quality Improvement." The Korean Economic Review 11(1) (1995) : 49-66.
  17. Shaked, A., and Sutton, J. "Relaxing Price Competition Through Price Differentiation." Review of Economic Studies 49 (1982) : 3-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297136