A longitudinal analysis of ethnic unemployment differentials in the UK

Key takeaways

(file:///C:\Users\scott\Zotero\storage\PAZTM6H8\Longhi%20-%202020%20-%20A%20longitudinal%20analysis%20of%20ethnic%20unemployment%20dif.pdf)

Bibliography: Longhi, S., 2020. A longitudinal analysis of ethnic unemployment differentials in the UK. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 46, 879–892. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1539254

Authors:: Simonetta Longhi

Collections:: UCL UKHLS Dump

First-page: 879

Abstract

As in many developed countries, in the UK the unemployment rate of ethnic minorities is higher than the unemployment rate of the white British majority. These diﬀerences may be due to a higher probability of ethnic minorities entering unemployment by losing a job, or to a lower probability of exiting unemployment by ﬁnding a job. Using Understanding Society, the UK Household Longitudinal Study, this paper analyses what individual and job characteristics contribute to job loss, what contribute to job ﬁnding, and to what extent ethnic unemployment diﬀerentials can be explained by such characteristics.

Citations

content: "@longhiLongitudinalAnalysisEthnic2020" -file:@longhiLongitudinalAnalysisEthnic2020

Reading notes

Imported on 2024-06-26 11:23

⭐ Important

& Using Understanding Society, the UK Household Longitudinal Study, this paper analyses what individual and job characteristics contribute to job loss, what contribute to job finding, and to what extent ethnic unemployment differentials can be explained by such characteristics. (p. 879)
& For both men and women the results show no relevant ethnic differences in the probability to transition from a paid job into unemployment. Only Indian UK born women seem more likely to transition than white British majority women, while for other groups the small differences are in favour of ethnic minorities. (p. 879)
& In the UK, as in many developed countries, ethnic minorities are more likely to be unemployed than the white majority (Blackaby et al. 2002; Clark and Drinkwater 2009). (p. 879)
& Networks of co-ethnics may increase the probability of finding a job via informal referrals (Bayer, Ross, and Topa 2008; Hellerstein, McInerney, and Neumark 2011) and may have a positive impact on labour market outcomes (Edin, Fredriksson, and Aslund 2003; Damm 2009). However, networks of co-ethnics may also have a negative impact on labour market outcomes (Clark and Drinkwater 2002) if such networks are characterised by a large proportion of unemployed people, or if they promote the adoption of identities opposed to that of the majority (Battu and Zenou 2010). (p. 880)
& Another explanation for ethnic unemployment differentials is related to the spatial mismatch hypothesis, i.e. the concentration of ethnic minorities in areas with fewer job opportunities, and their lower willingness to commute long distances for work (e.g. Thomas 1998; Hellerstein, Neumark, and McInerney 2008; Gobillon, Rupert, and Wasmer 2014; Rathelot 2014). (p. 880)
& The results of the models including the individual characteristics are shown in columns (2a) and (2b) of Table 1. The estimated coefficients are smaller in columns (2a) and (2b) compared to columns (1a) and (1b), thus suggesting that part of the ethnic differentials in the probability of unemployment is related to individual characteristics. (p. 886)
& In summary, ethnic differences in the probability of unemployment do not seem to be the result of a higher probability to transition into unemployment. Even when these differences are statistically significant, they are rather small in magnitude, and often are in favour of ethnic minorities. Therefore, there seems to be no evidence that segregation in worse jobs and occupations plays a relevant role in the explanation of ethnic unemployment differentials. (p. 887)