In this research note it is shown that, by applying cointegration and causality techniques to U.S. state-level panel data, there is a negative long-run relationship between unionization and income inequality in the United States, and that causality is unidirectional from unionization to inequality.
AndrewsD.JencksC.LeighA. (2011). Do rising top incomes lift all boats?Berkeley Electronic Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy (Contributions), 11, Article 6.
2.
AghionP.CaroliE.Garcia-PeñalosaC. (1999). Inequality and economic growth: The perspective of the new growth theories. Journal of Economic Literature, 37, 1615-1660.
3.
AutorD.KatzL.KearneyM. (2008). Trends in U.S. wage inequality: Revising the revisionists. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90, 300-323.
4.
BentolilaS.Saint-PaulG. (2003). Explaining movements in the labor share. Berkeley Electronic Journal of Macroeconomics (Contributions), 3, Article 9.
5.
BrücknerM.GerlingK.GrünerH. P. (2010). Wealth inequality and credit markets: Evidence from three industrialized countries. Journal of Economic Growth, 15, 155-176.
6.
CanningD.PedroniP. (2008). Infrastructure, long-run economic growth and causality tests for cointegrated panels. Manchester School, 76, 504-527.
7.
ChecchiD.García-PeñalosaC. (2010). Labour market institutions and the personal distribution of income in the OECD. Economica, 77, 413-450.
8.
ChecchiD.VisserJ.vandeWerfhorstH. G. (2010). Inequality and union membership: The influence of relative earnings and inequality attitudes. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 48, 84-108.
9.
ChintrakarnP.HerzerD.NunnenkampP. (2012). FDI and income inequality: Evidence from a panel of US states. Economic Inquiry, 50, 788-801.
10.
CoeD. T.HelpmanE.HoffmaisterA. W. (2009). International R&D spillovers and institutions. European Economic Review, 53, 723-741.
11.
EberhardtM.TealF. (2013). No mangoes in the tundra: Spatial heterogeneity in agricultural productivity analysis. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 75, 914-939.
12.
EngleR. E.GrangerC. W. J. (1987). Cointegration and error-correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55, 251-276.
13.
EntorfH. (1997). Random walks with drifts: Nonsense regression and spurious fixed-effects estimation. Journal of Econometrics, 80, 287-296.
14.
FrankM. W. (2009). Inequality and growth in the United States: Evidence from a new state-level panel of income inequality measures. Economic Inquiry, 47, 55-68.
15.
GlynA. (2009). Functional distribution and inequality. In SalverdaW.NolanB.SmeedingT. M. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of economic inequality (pp. 101-126). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
16.
GrangerC. W. J. (1988). Some recent developments in a concept of causality. Journal of Econometrics, 39, 199-211.
17.
HallS. G.MilneA. (1994). The relevance of P-star analysis to UK monetary policy. Economic Journal, 104, 597-604.
18.
HerzerD.StrulikH.VollmerS. (2012). The long-run determinants of fertility: One century of demographic change 1900-1999. Journal of Economic Growth, 17, 357-385.
19.
HollyS.PesaranM. H.YamagataT. (2010). A spatio-temporal model of house prices in the USA. Journal of Econometrics, 158, 160-173.
20.
JacobsenP. W. E.GilesD. E. A. (1998). Income distribution in the United States: Kuznets’ inverted-U hypothesis and data non-stationarity. Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 7, 405-423.
21.
JuseliusK. (2006). The cointegrated VAR model: Methodology and applications. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
22.
KapetaniosG.PesaranM. H.YamagataT. (2011). Panels with nonstationary multifactor error structures. Journal of Econometrics, 160, 326-348.
23.
KaoC. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90, 1-44.
24.
KuznetsS. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review, 45, 1-28.
25.
MollickA. V. (2012). Income inequality in the U.S.: The Kuznets hypothesis revisited. Economic Systems, 36, 127-144.
26.
NielsenF. (1994). Income inequality and industrial development: Dualism revisited. American Sociological Review, 59, 654-677.
27.
NielsenF.AldersonA. S. (1995). Income inequality, development, and dualism: Results from an unbalanced cross-national panel. American Sociological Review, 60, 674-701.
28.
PartridgeM. D.RickmanD. S.LevernierW. (1996). Trends in U.S. income inequality: Evidence from a panel of states. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 36, 17-37.
29.
PesaranM. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74, 967-1012.
30.
PesaranM. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312.
31.
PesaranH.TosettiE. (2011). Large panels with common factors and spatial correlation. Journal of Econometrics, 161, 182-202.
32.
PikettyT.SaezE. (2006). The evolution of top incomes: A historical and international perspective. American Economic Review, 96, 200-205.
33.
RamR. (1991). Kuznets’s inverted-U hypothesis: Evidence from a highly developed country. Southern Economic Journal, 57, 1112-1123.
34.
StockJ. H.WatsonM. W. (2008). Forecasting in dynamic factor models subject to structural instability. In CastleJ.ShephardN. (Eds.), The methodology and practice of econometrics, A Festschrift in honour of Professor David F. Hendry (pp.173-205). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
35.
WesterlundJ. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69, 709-748.
