Skip to main content

Table 2 Spatial panel data estimation by region. Fixed effects, 2005–2018

From: A spatial analysis of precariousness and the gender wage gap in Mexico, 2005–2018

SAR models

Fixed effects

Manufacturing sector

High tertiary

Low tertiary

Total tertiary sector

Precariousness difference

− 0.29 a

− 0.32 a

− 0.47a

− 0.45a

− 0.09

− 0.09

− 0.25a

− 0.26 a

(− 2.75)

(− 2.96)

(− 4.21)

(− 4.01)

(− 1.22)

(−1.26)

(− 2.87)

(− 2.98)

Training difference

0.009

0.01

0.05 c

0.05c

− 0.02

− 0.01

− 0.003

− 0.004

(0.73)

(0.71)

(1.93)

(1.87)

(− 1.08)

(−0.99)

(− 0.15)

(− 0.19)

Difference in experience

0.39 b

0.37b

0.42 b

0.38 c

0.06

0.007

0.14

0.11

(2.41)

(2.22)

(2.05)

(1.82)

(0.36)

(0.04)

(0.82)

(0.61)

Difference in occupation

0.38a

0.46 b

0.45 a

− 0.23

− 0.17 c

− 1.29 a

0.17 b

− 0.17

(3.92)

(2.02)

(4.51)

(− 0.45)

(− 1.89)

(−2.65)

(2.19)

(− 0.35)

Difference in education

0.61b

 

1.64a

 

1.59 a

 

1.61 a

 

(2.41)

 

(4.41)

 

(5.87)

 

(5.35)

 

Difference in primary education

 

− 0.07

 

0.05

 

0.09

 

− 0.02

 

(− 0.95)

 

(0.39)

 

(0.91)

 

(− 0.159)

Difference in secondary education

 

− 0.05

 

0.09

 

0.14

 

− 0.08

 

(− 0.54)

 

(0.49)

 

(0.87)

 

(− 0.46)

Difference in under/post-graduate studies

 

0.05

 

0.47a

 

0.78 a

 

0.38 c

 

(0.81)

 

(2.76)

 

(3.44)

 

(1.93)

Rho

0.01

0.01

0.08

0.07

0.03

0.04

0.11 c

0.12 b

(0.15)

(0.17)

(1.38)

(1.33)

(0.52)

(0.77)

(1.89)

(2.15)

LM1

5.57a

4.91a

5.45a

5.04a

4.32a

3.26a

7.57a

6.55a

LM2

− 0.97

1.00

1.94c

1.88b

0.93

0.84

2.54b

2.1b

CLMlambda

0.09

0.05

1.36

1.43

0.54

0.75

1.94b

2.17b

Hausman spatial

13.72b

30.44a

5.53

3.29

10.86c

11.33

7.83

3.11

  1. a, b, cLevels of significance: 1%, 5%, and 10%, respectively
  2. t statistics for each estimated coefficient are shown in parentheses
  3. Source: Authors’ extrapolation based on information from the National Survey of Occupation and Employment