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.

Wage and Price Differences, Technology Gap and Labor Flow Dynamics

The Impact of Labor Cost on Labor Productivity: Evidence from China's Provincial Panel Data

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

Transformation Employment Structure and Regional Employment Structure Change——Based on Comparative Research of Chinese and Six Provinces

Sectoral heterogeneity, industrial structure transformation, and changes in total labor income share

Labor Flow and Wage Disparity

Labor linkages and flow paths of industry in China

Determinants of China’s Structural Change During the Reform Era

The Distortion of the Labor Market,the Difference in its Efficiency,and the Income Disparity between Peasants and Town People

Labor Market Dynamics and Structural Change: Evidence from China

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

Model Equilibrium and Empirical Study of Rural Labor Transfer

The wage structure and gap between public and private sectors: an empirical study in urban China

Labor market segmentation and the gender wage gap: Evidence from China

Research on Capital-deepening, Structural Change and Labor Income Share

Labor Industry Allocation, Industrial Structure Optimization, and Economic Growth

Structural Change and Wage Inequality

Labor Mobility Barriers and Agricultural Productivity in China: Analysis Based on a General-Equilibrium Roy Model

Excess Labor Supply, Structural Change and Real Exchange Rate

The Rising Labor Costs and Spatial Restructure of Chinese Manufacturing

Labor Income Shares (LIS) in Economic Development: an Empirical Study Based on China's Sectoral‐level Data