Table 8 Robustness test of the causality between mediatory capacity of labor arbitration institutions and handled collective labor disputes
Models | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) | (11) | (12) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Methods | LSDV | LSDV | System-GMM | System-GMM | System-GMM | System-GMM |
One-step | One-step | Two-step | Two-step | |||
Dependent variables | Average involved workers per collective dispute case accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) | Proportion of collective dispute cases accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) | Average involved workers per collective dispute case accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) | Proportion of collective dispute cases accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) | Average involved workers per collective dispute case accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) | Proportion of collective dispute cases accepted by arbitration institutions (Ln) |
Dependent variables (Lag1) | 0.197** | 0.330* | −0.022 | −0.134 | ||
(0.070) | (0.132) | (0.520) | (0.267) | |||
Explanatory variables | ||||||
Mediatory capacity of labor arbitration institutions | −1.298* | 0.986 | −3.636* | 3.201 | ||
(0.587) | (0.722) | (1.444) | (1.700) | |||
Mediatory capacity of labor arbitration institutions (Lag1) | −0.777 | −0.073 | ||||
(0.448) | (0.376) | |||||
Previous control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Province-fixed effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Period-fixed effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Province-specific time trend | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
AR(1) | −3.20 p = .001 | −2.48 p = .013 | −0.88 p = .379 | −1.04 p = .299 | ||
AR(2) | 1.24 p = .213 | −0.93 p = .351 | 0.17 p = .866 | −0.62 p = .536 | ||
Sargan test | Chi2 = 78.13 p = .110 | Chi2 = 59.01 p = .043 | Chi2 = 36.34 p = .636 | Chi2 = 53.80 p = .028 | ||
Observations | 272 | 272 | 279 | 279 | 279 | 279 |
R-squared | 0.430 | 0.723 |