Search results

This study investigates the role of race, family background and education in earnings inequality between whites and the African descendent population in Brazil. It uses quantile Mincer earnings regressions to go beyond the usual decomposition of average earnings gaps. Differences in human capital, including parental education and education quality, and in its returns, account for most but not all of the racial earnings gaps. There appears to be greater pay discrimination at the higher salary jobs for any skill level. Returns to education vary with the gradient of skin color. While returns are similar for white and mixed race workers at the top of the adjusted wage scale, mixed race workers at the bottom are rewarded similar to blacks. Thus, while equalizing access to quality education is key to reduce racial earnings inequality in Brazil, specific policies are also needed to facilitate equal access of non‐whites to good quality jobs.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze gender disparities in labor earnings for a comprehensive set of 64 countries.

Using the methodological approach proposed by Ñopo, socio‐demographic characteristics are used to match males and females such that gender earnings disparities are computed only among individuals with the same observable characteristics.

Disparities are partially attributed to gender differences in observable socio‐demographic and job characteristics. After matching males and females with the same characteristics, the authors found that the earnings gap falls within a range between 8 per cent and 48 per cent of average females’ earnings, being more pronounced in South Asia and Sub‐Saharan Africa. The unexplained earnings gaps are more pronounced among part‐time workers and those with low education levels.

This paper presents a comprehensive view of gender earnings gaps in the world, simultaneously exploring many of the issues highlighted in the related literature. It adds value by exploring gender gaps in a comparative perspective, applying the same methods for several different countries.

This study investigates the formal/informal employment earnings gap in Turkey. We focus on the earnings differentials that can be explained by observable characteristics and unobservable time-invariant individual heterogeneity. We first, estimate the standard Mincer earnings equations using ordinary least squares (OLS), controlling for individual, household, and job characteristics. Next we use, panel data and the quantile regression (QR) techniques in order to account for unobserved factors which might affect the earnings and the intrinsic heterogeneity within formal and informal sectors. OLS results confirm the existence of an informal sector penalty almost half of which is explained by observable variables. We find that formal-salaried workers are paid significantly higher than their informal counterparts and of the self-employed confirming the heterogeneity within the informal employment. QR results show that pay differentials are not uniform along the earnings distribution. In contrast to the mainstream literature which views informal self-employment as the upper-tier and wage-employment as the lower-tier, we find that self-employment corresponds to the lower-tier in the Turkish labor market. Finally, fixed effects estimation indicates that unobserved individual characteristics combined with controls for observable characteristics explain the pay differentials between formal and informal employment entirely in the total and the female sample. However, informal sector penalty persists in the male sample.

Prior studies find that US firms with managerial incentives may manipulate the earnings gap to obscure higher performing segments to competitors or to hide underperforming segments from external monitors. The purpose of this study is to complement extant research by examining the association between managerial incentives and segment earnings reporting of cross-listed firms in the USA and the impact of country-level characteristics on this association.

The dependent variable is the earnings gap between firm-level earnings and sum of segment-level earnings. Managerial incentives are proxied by proprietary cost and agency cost. Proprietary cost is measured by the Herfindahl index. Agency cost is measured by inefficient resource transfer activities across segments. Foreign firms in this study are companies listed on major US Stock Exchanges with headquarters outside the USA. Comparable US firms are selected using the Propensity Score Matching procedure as a control group.

The authors find that 1) proprietary cost motive is not the determinant of earnings gap reporting for cross-listed firms; 2) cross-listed firms motivated by agency costs are more likely to manipulate segment earnings reporting than US firms; and 3) among cross-listed firms motivated by agency costs, firms in weak rule of law countries demonstrate more manipulation in segment earnings than firms in strong rule of law countries.

Extant research with regard to segment reporting exclusively focuses on US firms, and little is known about the practice of segment reporting by cross-listed firms originating from different legal regimes. This study fills the gap in the literature by comparing cross-listed firms to US firms in the reporting of segment earnings. The results of this study have implications for regulators and investors who are interested in evaluating the extent of cross-listed firms’ financial reporting quality.

There is now a large amount of literature on immigrants' relative earnings and immigrants' earnings assimilation in different countries. This paper aims to contribute to international research, since the paper investigates the earnings gap between different groups of immigrants and natives at different parts of the earnings distribution in Sweden.

Quantile regressions are estimated on a large dataset in order to study to what extent there are differences in the earnings gap between different groups of immigrants and natives at the top and the bottom of the earnings distribution in Sweden.

The study shows, that immigrants are doing relatively better at the top than at the bottom of the earnings distribution. This is the case for males as well as for females. Furthermore, the study also shows that in times of recession, the earnings gap between immigrants from European countries and natives remains stable, while the earnings gap between non‐European immigrants and natives at the bottom of the earnings distribution increases substantially.

This paper is useful to those wishing to examine the extent of differences in earnings between immigrants and natives and differences in earnings between different immigrant groups.

This paper documents how gender differences in occupational status (defined by earnings, education, and returns to skills) have evolved over time and across generations. The paper finds a persistent gender earnings gap, a reversal of the education gap, and a convergence in starting salaries and returns to experience. Divergent occupational choices might explain part of the persistent gender gaps and women’s failure to reach parity with men in the earnings distribution. Women choose more flexible jobs than men. But whereas men dominate women in high-powered occupations, they are also more likely to be in low-skilled low-pay occupations. Differential effects of children and time spent keeping house explain most of the gender gap in high-powered occupations but cannot explain fully why women choose more flexible occupations.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the earnings differentials between the locals and the rural–urban migrants in urban labor market in Vietnam.

Using the new Vietnam Rural-Urban Migration Survey 2013 (VRUMS2013) that is specifically designed for rural–urban migration, the author applies Appleton et al.’s (1999) procedure correcting for potential selectivity to decompose the offered earnings gap between the locals and the rural–urban migrants into within- and between-occupation pay differential. Bootstrapping is used to derive the standard errors for the decomposition results. The author further applies the propensity score matching (PSM) method to check whether the results are robust by restricting the sample to the “common support.”

Within-job difference, particularly, the favorable treatment toward urban workers contributes significantly to the overall and total unexplained earnings gap. Further, between-job pay differential attributed to the over-representation of urban workers in high-paying job also helps to widen the gap. These results are robust restricting to the “common support” sample using PSM.

Due to the sample size, occupations are only classified into three broad categories. Finer classification will allow a better comparison between the contributions of between and within-occupation to earning inequality. The data are only limited to a few cities and do not include other urban centers that also receive rural–urban migrants.

Policies to promote equal pay and alleviate within-job “discrimination,” especially the preferential treatment favoring the locals (rather than to provide equal access to different jobs) are crucial for migrants’ labor outcome. Moreover, this study can, to some extent, be seen as a timely contribution for the debate on household registration reform in general and in Vietnam specifically. Given China’s announcement to grant permanent household registration (hukou) to unregistrated migrants in late 2015, investigating whether there is a two-tier labor market in the cities in Vietnam is particularly important for the ongoing debate regarding future of household registration system (ho khau).

This is the first study in Vietnam on rural–urban migration and occupation segregation – an area that has been relatively less well studied in developing/transitional countries. Vietnam is also one of the few developing countries who have household registration system in place. This has made it an interesting case. The author uses a new survey data to apply the Appleton et al. (1999) decomposition on the offered wage gap rather than observed wage gap. Standard errors of the decomposition results are bootstrapped and a robust check using propensity score method is conducted.

The changes in women’s and men’s work lives have been considerable in recent decades. Yet much of the recent research on gender differences in employment and earnings has been of a more snapshot nature rather than taking a longer comparative look at evolving patterns. In this paper, we use 50 years (1964–2013) of US Census Annual Demographic Files (March Current Population Survey) to track the changing returns to human capital (measured as both educational attainment and potential work experience), estimating comparable earnings equations by gender at each point in time. We consider the effects of sample selection over time for both women and men and show the rising effect of selection for women in recent years. Returns to education diverge for women and men over this period in the selection-adjusted results but converge in the OLS results, while returns to potential experience converge in both sets of results. We also create annual calculations of synthetic lifetime labor force participation, hours, and earnings that indicate convergence by gender in worklife patterns, but less convergence in recent years in lifetime earnings. Thus, while some convergence has indeed occurred, the underlying mechanisms causing convergence differ for women and men, reflecting continued fundamental differences in women’s and men’s life experiences.

This paper addresses revolutionary changes in the education, fertility and market work of U.S. families formed in the 1870s–1920s: Fertility fell from 5.3 to 2.6; the graduation rate of their children increased from 7% to 50%; and the fraction of adulthood wives devoted to market-oriented work increased from 7% to 23% (by one measure).

These trends are addressed within a unified framework to examine the ability of several proposed mechanisms to quantitatively replicate these changes. Based on careful calibration, the choices of successive generations of representative husband-and-wife households over the quantity and quality of their children, household production, and the extent of mother’s involvement in market-oriented production are simulated.

Rising wages, declining mortality, a declining gender wage gap, and increased efficiency and public provision of schooling cannot, individually or in combination, reduce fertility or increase stocks of human capital to levels seen in the data. The best fit of the model to the data also involves: (1) a decreased tendency among parents to view potential earnings of children as the property of parents and (2) rising consumption shares per dependent child.

Greater attention should be given the determinants of parental control of the work and earnings of children for this period.

One contribution is the gathering of information and strategies necessary to establish an initial baseline, and the time paths for parameters and targets for this period beset with data limitations. A second contribution is identifying the contributions of various mechanisms toward reaching those calibration targets.

Several studies find that there is little sex gap in wages at labor market entry, and that the sex gap in wages emerges (and grows) with time in the labor market. This evidence is consistent with (i) there is little or no sex discrimination in wages at labor market entry, and (ii) the emergence of the sex gap in wages with time in the labor market reflects differences between women and men in human capital investment (and other decisions), with women investing less early in their careers. Indeed, some economists explicitly interpret the evidence this way. We show that this interpretation ignores two fundamental implications of the human capital model, and that differences in investment can complicate the interpretation of both the starting sex gap in wages (or absence of a gap), and the differences in “returns” to experience. We then estimate stylized structural models of human capital investment and wage growth to identify the effects of discrimination (or other sources of a starting pay gap) and differences in human capital investment.