Imperfect Competition and Rents in Labor and Product Markets: The Case of the Construction Industry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing work on imperfect competition typically focuses on either the labor market or the product market in isolation.In contrast, we analyze imperfect competition in both markets jointly, showing theoretically and empirically that focusing on one market in isolation may result in a limited or misleading picture of the degree and impacts of market power.Our empirical setting is the US construction industry.We develop, identify and estimate a model where construction firms imperfectly compete with one another for workers in the labor market and for projects in both the private market and the government market, where government projects are procured through auctions.Our analyses combine the universe of business and worker tax records with newly collected records from government procurement auctions.We use the estimated model to quantify the markdown of wages and the markup of prices, to show that the impacts of an increase in market power in one market are attenuated by the existence of market power in the other market, and to quantify the rents, rent-sharing, and incidence of procurements in the US construction industry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it