Occupational segregation with economic disadvantage: an investigation of decomposable indexes

Abstract

Purpose – This paper considers methods for decomposing indexes that incorporate economic disadvantage into a measure of segregation. According to such indexes, segregation in high-economic-status occupations is worse than similar segregation in low-economic-status occupations. The paper presents three decompositions of these indexes.

Methodology/Approach – The paper first characterizes a class of segregation indexes that include economic disadvantage in the index. It then develops mathematical methods for decomposing a change in such an index. The change is decomposed into two or more components: components that indicate either the effect of changes in economic disadvantage or the effect of changes in a standard measure of segregation – a measure that essentially ignores economic disadvantage. The paper then implements the decompositions using data on U.S. occupational segregation by gender between 1970 and 2000.

Findings – The primary finding is that a segregation index that incorporate economic disadvantage can be decomposed in interesting ways. A secondary finding is that such indexes indicate reduced segregation between 1970 and 2000. The dominant forces associated with the reduction were (a) the convergence of occupational gender ratios and (b) the movement of women out of less advantaged occupations and into the comparatively well-compensated professional and managerial occupations.

Research limitations/Implications – The 1970–2000 results are mainly illustrative. They are based on three broad occupational categories for which there were compatible earnings data, and the analysis could quite feasibly be done with more detailed occupational categories.

Citation

Hutchens, R. (2009), "Occupational segregation with economic disadvantage: an investigation of decomposable indexes", Flückiger, Y., Reardon, S.F. and Silber, J. (Ed.) Occupational and Residential Segregation (Research on Economic Inequality, Vol. 17), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1049-2585(2009)0000017008