簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 蕭宇辰
Hsiao, Amy Yu-Chen
論文名稱： 探討帶薪家庭照顧假和病假政策對公司創新的影響– 來自準實驗的證據
Examining the Impact of Paid Family and Medical Leave Policy on Firm Innovation: Evidence from Quasi-Experiments
指導教授： 兪在元
Yoo, Jaewon
口試委員: 雷松亞
Ray, Soumya
金南日
Kim, Namil
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 科技管理學院 - 服務科學研究所
Institute of Service Science
論文出版年： 2024
畢業學年度： 112
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 51
中文關鍵詞： 帶薪家庭照顧假和病假 、公司創新 、雙重差分法 、專利
外文關鍵詞： Paid Family and Medical Leave, Firm Innovation, Difference-in-Difference, Patent
相關次數： 點閱：67  下載：0 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 這篇論文深入探討了在美國實施的帶薪家庭照顧假和病假（PFML）對公司創新的影響，運用了創新的實證研究方法來填補現有文獻的空白。隨著家庭與醫療假法案（FMLA）實施三十週年，該法案雖在當初設立時具有開創性，提供長達12週的無薪保障假期，但今日已不足以滿足現代勞動力的需求。值得注意的是，美國仍是經濟合作與發展組織（OECD）中唯一沒有全國性帶薪家庭假政策的國家。本研究針對美國各州所實行的州級PFML政策進行了深入分析，這些政策提供了帶薪假期，影響了公司創新– 一個至關重要但鮮少被探討的經濟競爭力因素。透過應用Callaway與Sant’Anna所提出的雙重差分法（Difference-in-differences, or Diff-in-diff, DiD），本研究調查了1994年至2015年間不同州階段性實施PFML政策的企業創新成果，特別關注專利申請數量和調整後的總引用次數。研究結果顯示，PFML對企業創新有顯著的正面影響，這表明PFML政策不僅緩解了員工面臨的挑戰，實際上還積極促進了公司的創新輸出。本研究將PFML政策納入更廣泛的勞動力政策討論，挑戰了將這些政策視作企業成本的常見觀點，並強調其作為人力資本投資的潛力，能夠提升創新並帶來回報– 這些洞見對正在考慮擴展親子友好政策以促進更包容且富有生產力的經濟環境的政策制定者、商界領袖和學術界人士而言，尤其寶貴。

    This thesis examines the impact of Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) on firm innovation within the United States, employing a novel empirical approach to address a gap in current research. As the U.S. marks the 30th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA),
    which offers unpaid leave, the absence of a federal paid leave policy stands in stark contrast to other OECD countries. This study explores how state-level PFML policies, which provide paid leave, affect firm innovation, a crucial aspect of economic competitiveness that has been underexplored in the context of PFML. Utilizing a difference-in-differences methodology as proposed by Callaway and Sant’Anna, the research investigates firm-level innovation outcomes, specifically the number of patents and adjusted total citations, across various states with staggered implementations of PFML policies from 1994 to 2015. The findings indicate that PFML has a positive and statistically significant effect on firm innovation, suggesting that PFML policies do not merely alleviate employee challenges but actively contribute to enhancing a firm’s innovative output. By integrating PFML into the broader discussion of workforce policies, this study challenges the prevailing view of such policies as burdensome costs to businesses. Instead, it highlights their potential as investments in human capital that yield returns in the form of higher innovation. These insights are particularly valuable for policymakers, business leaders, and scholars as they consider the implications of expanding family-friendly policies to foster a more inclusive and productive economic
    environment.

    Contents Abstract ------------------------------------------------------------ I Abstract (Chinese) -------------------------------------------------- II Acknowledgements ----------------------------------------------------III Contents ------------------------------------------------------------ IV List of Tables ------------------------------------------------------ VI 1 Introduction ------------------------------------------------------ 1 2 Literature Review and Hypothesis Development ---------------------- 5 2.1 Impact of PFL on Employers -------------------------------------- 5 3 Data Source and Data preprocessing -------------------------------- 9 3.1 Literature Review on Proxies for Measuring Innovation ----------- 9 3.2 Patent Data ----------------------------------------------------- 11 3.3 Measurements of Firm Innovation --------------------------------- 12 3.4 Firm-Level Data ------------------------------------------------- 13 3.5 State-Level Data ------------------------------------------------ 13 3.6 Treatment Variable ---------------------------------------------- 14 4 Methodology ------------------------------------------------------- 17 4.1 Propensity Score Matching (PSM) --------------------------------- 17 4.2 Difference-in-Differences (DiD) --------------------------------- 19 4.2.1 Limitation of TWFE -------------------------------------------- 22 4.2.2 Callaway and Sant’Anna’s approach to DiD -------------------- 24 5 Empirical Results and Discussion ---------------------------------- 27 5.1 Verification of Parallel Trends Assumption ---------------------- 29 5.2 Aggregating group-time average treatment effects, or ATT(g, t) -- 29 6 Limitation and Conclusion ----------------------------------------- 34 References ---------------------------------------------------------- 38 7 Appendix- R Code -------------------------------------------------- 41 .1 Data Preprocessing ----------------------------------------------- 41 .2 Propensity Score Matching and TWFE Regression -------------------- 47 .3 DiD by Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) ---------------------------- 50

    1. Allred, B. B., & Park, W. G. (2007). Patent rights and innovative activity: Evidence from national and firm-level data. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 878–900.
    2. Appelbaum, E., & Milkman, R. (2011). Leaves that pay: Employer and worker experiences with paid family leave in california.
    3. Atallah, G., & Rodr´ıguez, G. (2006). Indirect patent citations. Scientometrics, 67 (3), 437–465.
    4. Bailey, A., Balcombe, K., Morrison, J., & Thirtle, C. (2003). A comparison of proxy variable and stochastic latent variable approaches to the measurement of bias in technological change in south african agriculture. Economics of Innovation and new Technology, 12 (4), 315–324.
    5. Bartel, A., Rossin-Slater, M., Ruhm, C., Slopen, M., & Waldfogel, J. (2023). The impact of paid family leave on employers: Evidence from new york. Community, Work & Family, 1–19.
    6. Bartel, A. P., Rossin-Slater, M., Ruhm, C. J., Slopen, M., & Waldfogel, J. (2021). Support for paid family leave among small employers increases during the covid-19 pandemic. Socius, 7, 23780231211061959.
    7. Bloom, N., Kretschmer, T., & Van Reenen, J. (2011). Are family-friendly workplace practices avaluable firm resource? Strategic Management Journal, 32 (4), 343–367.
    8. Borusyak, K., & Jaravel, X. (2018). Revisiting event study designs. SSRN.
    9. Burda, M., & Wyplosz, C. (2013). Macroeconomics: A european text. Oxford University Press, USA.
    10. Callaway, B., & Sant’Anna, P. H. (2021). Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods. Journal of econometrics, 225 (2), 200–230.
    11. Chen, C., Chen, Y., Hsu, P.-H., & Podolski, E. J. (2016). Be nice to your innovators: Employee treatment and corporate innovation performance. Journal of corporate finance, 39, 78–98.
    12. Connolly, M. (2003). The dual nature of trade: Measuring its impact on imitation and growth. Journal of Development Economics, 72 (1), 31–55.
    13. Connolly, M. P., et al. (1997). Technology, trade and growth: Some empirical findings (tech. rep.). Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    14. De Chaisemartin, C., & d’Haultfoeuille, X. (2020). Two-way fixed effects estimators with heterogeneous treatment effects. American economic review, 110 (9), 2964–2996.
    15. Ejermo, O. (2009). Regional innovation measured by patent data—does quality matter? research paper. Industry and Innovation, 16 (2), 141–165.
    16. Gao, H., & Zhang, W. (2017). Employment nondiscrimination acts and corporate innovation. Management Science, 63 (9), 2982–2999.
    17. Goodman, J. M., Elser, H., & Dow, W. H. (2020). Employer-reported access to paid parental leave: A study of san francisco’s paid parental leave ordinance. SSM-population health, 11, 100627.
    18. Goodman-Bacon, A. (2021). Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing. Journal of econometrics, 225 (2), 254–277.
    19. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The nber patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools.
    20. Huang, X. S., & Shu, T. (2023). The price of health: Paid sick leave mandates and corporate innovation. Tao, The Price of Health: Paid Sick Leave Mandates and Corporate Innovation (October 18, 2023).
    21. Iwaisako, T., & Futagami, K. (2013). Patent protection, capital accumulation, and economic growth. Economic Theory, 52, 631–668.
    22. Jin, Y., & Zhu, Q. (2021). Paid family leave, inventor mobility, and firm innovation. Inventor Mobility, and Firm Innovation (July 27, 2021).
    23. Jones, C. I. (2002). Introduction to economic growth. (No Title).
    24. Kogan, L., Papanikolaou, D., Seru, A., & Stoffman, N. (2017). Technological innovation, resource allocation, and growth. The quarterly journal of economics, 132 (2), 665–712.
    25. Lerner, S., & Appelbaum, E. (2014). Business as usual: New jersey employers’ experiences with family leave insurance (tech. rep.). Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    26. Milkman, R., & Appelbaum, E. (2017). Unfinished business: Paid family leave in california and the future of us work-family policy. Cornell University Press.
    27. Smith, K. (2005). Measuring innovation. https://figshare.utas.edu.au/articles/chapter/Measuringinnovation/23249615
    28. Sun, L., & Abraham, S. (2021). Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. Journal of econometrics, 225 (2), 175–199.

    QR CODE