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.

Equal Convergence? Convergence Patterns Among Immigrants by Occupation

Migrants from a Different Shore: Earnings and Economic Assimilation of Immigrants from China in the United States

Employer policies and the immigrant–native earnings gap

A Nation of Immigrants: Assimilation and Economic Outcomes in the Age of Mass Migration

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

The relative pay for foreign work: A novel evidence from home and host countries

The Intersection of Immigration and Gender: Labor Force Outcomes of Immigrant Women Scientists

U.S. Long-Term Earnings Outcomes by Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Place of Birth

Asian‐Americans’ Earnings Disadvantage Reexamined: the Role of Place of Education

The Wage Premium of Naturalized Citizenship

Examining Wage Disparities by Race and Ethnicity of Health Care Workers

Ethnic Enclaves and the Earnings of Immigrants

Immigration and labour market flows

The composition of wage differentials between migrants and natives

The domestic economic impacts of immigration

Restoring Culture and Capital to Cultural Capital: Origin–Destination Cultural Distance and Immigrant Earnings in the United States

Unionization, licensure and workplace variation in pay inequality between immigrants and natives

The Dynamic Change in Wage Gap Between Urban Residents and Rural Migrants in Chinese Cities

Immigrant-native gaps of unemployment and permanent employment in Japan

Wages of Skilled Migrant and Native Employees in Germany: New Light on an Old Issue

The within occupation and industry component of the immigrant-native gap in U.S. self-employment rates