Regional Differences in the Labour Market Response to Volunteers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstracts: Regional Differences in the Labour Market Response to Volunteers. Using a national survey on volunteering, this paper establishes that the regional labour markets reward volunteers over and above their non-volunteering counterparts. The earnings differential accorded volunteers differs quite remarkably from region to region: from about 13 % in British Columbia to 1 in the Atlantic provinces. Several factors may explain these differences which rely on the characteristics of regional labour markets and the reasons why volunteers may earn a premium over non-volunteers. ********** One of the many reasons why individuals may volunteer is to enhance employment prospects. Students volunteer in order to bolster their resumes (e.g. Dicken and Blomberg 1988); stay-at-home mothers volunteer when trying to re-enter the labour force (e.g. Mueller 1975); business people volunteer to further their job prospects (e.g. Saloner 1985). Underlying these examples is the presumption that the act of volunteering will improve labour-market outcomes. Indeed, the notion that volunteering enhances employment has basically joined the ranks of well-known fact in the western world. Until recently, however, the relationship between volunteering and the paid labour market had not been empirically investigated. The first paper to test the extent to which the labour market may reward volunteers over and above their non-volunteering counterparts was Day and Devlin (1998), which found that volunteers earned a premium of about 6 % of annual earnings. Using an improved data set, Devlin (2000) confirmed these earlier findings. (1) Using a recent data set, Devlin (2000) determined that, on average, volunteers earn more than 4% higher earnings in comparison to their non-volunteering counterparts. To establish this figure, various earnings equations were estimated which included, among the usual determinants of earnings, dummy variables denoting the individual's region of residence. Moreover, the decision to volunteer was frequently found to be influenced by region of residence. It would appear that the region in which an individual resides can affect both the decision to volunteer, and the labour-market impact of volunteering. Two questions naturally arise: what are the regional differences in the labour market responses to volunteering? And, why should the region in which an individual resides matter? The first question is an empirical one, and is addressed in this paper using the recent National Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating (1997). The second question, concerning why the region of residence should matter, is in many ways a much more profound question--and is certainly one that has motivated much of the work on regional issues in Canada. While we offer several reasons why region may matter when it comes to the payoff to volunteering, we cannot determine definitely the answer to this question. At least three explanations exist as to why volunteers may earn more on the paid labour market in comparison to non-volunteers. Volunteers can acquire skills that are valued by the labour market, leading volunteers to have higher earnings compared to non-volunteers. Thus, for instance, volunteering at a women's shelter may help a student of social work find permanent employment. The benefits from volunteering, however, need not be so tangible. The fact that an individual volunteers his or her time may signal potential employers about some unobservable but desirable trait of the individual, again leading to better employment. The volunteer would be chosen by a potential employer over an otherwise comparable non-volunteer. Lastly, volunteering may simply expose individuals to a valuable network of contacts who aid them in furthering employment prospects; volunteering for certain service organisations, like the Rotary Club, has often been associated with beneficial networking. From the point of view of this study, it is important to ascertain whether regional differences exist in the three mechanisms which link the labour market and volunteering. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».