Abstract:Three strictly comparable cross-section household dataset,related to 1988,1995 and 2001,are used to analyze the rapid yet unequal growth of wage and the sharp widening of wage structure.Earnings functions are compared and the increase in both the level and the inequality of wages are decomposed into their constituent elements.Distinctions are made between the variables likely to represent human capital,discrimination,and segmentation.The evidence suggests that productive characteristics were increasingly rewarded as marketization The Gini coefficient of earnings rose by 10.7 percentage points in the first phase from 1988 to 1995.Whereas the mean wage increased by 67 percent,the pay of the 10th percentile rose by only 22 percent,and that of the 90th percentile rose by 97 percent.These changes are much larger than those of the second phase from 1995 to 2001.Moreover,the returns to education rose sharply,as did the returns to occupation-specific skills.The initially slight inverse-U shape of the age-earnings profile became more pronounced: a change consistent with human capital theory.Thus the productive characteristics of workers were increasingly rewarded in the labor market.However,there were also signs of greater wage discrimination against women.Moreover,the market forces operating in the growing private sector and the relative immunity of the state sector from those forces generated greater wage segmentation among types of ownership,and provincial differences in the pace of reform and in economic growth created spatial segmentation in wages that could not be removed by the equilibrating movement of labor.Decomposition analyses were conducted in order to examine the contribution of particular characteristics to the rise in the Gini coefficient.Only a third of earnings inequality and its increase could be explained: the unobserved determinants are clearly important to the increase in earnings dispersion.The discrimination variables accounted for only a small part of the increase.The segmentation variables made the most important contribution,and that was mainly due to growing wage dispersion among provinces.This result is supported by other evidence of powerful divergence in mean earnings among provinces(Knight,Li and Zhao,2001).Some but not all components of human capital were disequalizing.These particular changes are likely to represent the stirring of labor market forces.

Trade Liberalization,Biased Learning Effect and Wage Inequality in Developing Countries

DIRECTED TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE: A KNOWLEDGE-BASED MODEL

Trade Liberalisation and Labour Income Share Variation: an Interpretation of China’s Deviation from the Stolper–Samuelson Theorem

Skill-biased Technical Progress,North-south Trade and Wage Inequality

Export,Bias of Technological Change and Wage Inequality in China

Marketization and Unequal Growth of Wage: Their Extent and Influence Factors

Skill-biased Technological Change and Wage Inequality in Developing Countries

Wage Inequality and Input Trade Liberalization: Firm-Level Evidence from China

Skill Premium, Biased Technological Change and Income Differences

N ° 2008-06 Trade , technology adoption and wage inequalities : theory and evidence

Trade,Technology,Labor Market Regulation and the Wage Premium in China's Industrial Sector

Measured Skill Premia and Input Trade Liberalization: Evidence from Chinese Firms

Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality

On Skill Premium and Wage Inequality Theory

Effect of Trade Liberalization on the Volatility of China′s Industrial Employment and Wage

Market Access, Labor Mobility, and the Wage Skill Premium: New Evidence from Chinese Cities

International Trade,Wage Rigidities and Labor Income Share in China

Globalization, Trade, and Wages: What Does History Tell Us about China?

Does Skill Premium Derive from Biased Technical Change?

Privatization and Wage Inequality in Developing Countries