Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Technology, routinization and wage inequality: gender differences in the case of Uruguay Cover

Technology, routinization and wage inequality: gender differences in the case of Uruguay

Open Access
|Dec 2023

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Log hourly wages 2005/2006 and 2014/2015, by gender.

Variable2005/062014/15
With imputationWithout imputationWith imputationWithout imputation
Means.eMeans.eMeans.e.Means.e.
All3.632(0.004)3.658(0.004)4.213(0.003)4.228(0.003)
Male3.724(0.005)3.736(0.005)4.314(0.004)4.320(0.004)
Female3.537(0.005)3.572(0.006)4.114(0.004)4.134(0.004)

[i] Notes: Number of observations: 2005/2006 38,522 2014/2015 41,893 without imputation and 43,022 and 45,063 with imputation in 2005 and 2015 respectevely.

[ii] Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014,2015 data.

Table 2

Descriptive statistics

Variable2005/062014/15Di · 2005 – 2015
With imputationWithout imputationWith imputationWithout imputationWith imputationWithout imputation
A: Men
Age40.38840.51040.28140.418−0.108−0.093
Education
6 years or less0.2900.2860.2120.209−0.079−0.077
7 to 9 years0.3270.3250.2890.288−0.038−0.037
10 to 12 years0.2430.2460.3310.3330.0880.087
13 to 16 years0.0670.0670.0840.0840.0180.017
16 and more years0.0740.0760.0840.0850.0100.009
Non – married0.2760.2610.3040.2910.0280.030
Resto of the country0.4920.4910.4730.473−0.019−0.018
Not registered0.2310.2080.0960.088−0.134−0.121
B: Women
Age40.90241.24440.88741.149−0.015−0.095
Education
6 years or less0.2610.2500.1850.177−0.076−0.073
7 to 9 years0.2700.2620.2330.225−0.037−0.037
10 to 12 years0.2700.2750.3520.3570.0820.082
13 to 16 years0.0970.1010.1070.1110.0100.010
16 and more years0.1020.1120.1220.1290.0200.017
Non – married0.4300.4370.3910.391−0.038−0.045
Rest of the country0.4550.4400.4660.4610.0100.021
Not registered0.3270.2820.1360.115−0.191−0.167

[i] Notes: Number of observations: 2005/2006 38,522 2014/2015 41,893 without imputation and 43,022 and 45,063 with imputation in 2005 and 2015 respectevely.

[ii] Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014,2015 data.

Figure 1

Log hourly wage change between 2005 and 2015, by gender

Note: i. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied. ii. Wages are expressed in real terms, 2010 prices.

Figure 2

Occupational category by gender

Note: Percentage of private workers by occupational category and gender in 2005 and 2015.

Figure 3

Information Task Content measure by Occupational Category

Note: Compiled by authors based on ECH-INE and National Center for O*NET Development. Blue bars correspond to men and violet ones to women.

Figure 4

Automation Task Content measure by Occupational Category

Note: Compiled by authors based on ECH-INE and National Center for O*NET Development. Blue bars correspond to men and violet ones to women.

Table 3

Average O*NET Indexes by Major Occupation Group 2005

A: WITH IMPUTATION2005
MENWOMEN
O*Net IndexesInformationAutomationInformationAutomation
Overall Mean0.5960.7390.6020.732
Standard Deviation0.1180.0620.1120.061
Manager, Professionals, Technicians0.7880.7020.7710.676
Clerical support and sale workers0.6660.7380.6720.744
Plant and machines operators and assemblers0.5460.7720.5180.803
Agricultural, construction and transport workers0.5430.7440.5220.747
Service workers0.5300.7130.5310.726
B: WITHOUT IMPUTATION
Overall Mean0.5980.7390.6070.732
Standard Deviation0.1190.0620.1140.061
Manager, Professionals, Technicians0.7890.7010.7710.676
Clerical support and sale workers0.6670.7380.6750.747
Plant and machines operators and assemblers0.5470.7720.5180.804
Agricultural, construction and transport workers0.5440.7440.5310.750
Service workers0.5300.7120.5310.726

[i] Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

[ii] Note: The information content index is computed as ICj=k=15Ijk23*Ljk13 where k = work activities: Getting information, Processing information, Analyzing data or information, Interacting with computers, Documenting/Recording information. The automation content is defined as ACj=l=15Fjl*Vjl where l = work context: Degree of automation, Importance of repeating same tasks, Structured versus unstructured work (reverse), Pace determined by speed of equipment, Spend time making repetitive motions. Task measures are normalized to range between zero and one.

Table 4

Avarage O*NET Indexes by Major Occupation Group 2015

A: WITH IMPUTATION2015
MENWOMEN
O*Net IndexesInformationAutomationInformationAutomation
Overall Mean0.6080.7380.6210.732
Standard Deviation0.1170.0630.1140.061
Manager, Professionals, Technicians0.7990.7060.7760.685
Clerical support and sale workers0.6700.7440.6680.746
Plant and machines operators and assemblers0.5520.7720.5180.802
Agricultural, construction and transport workers0.5590.7380.5610.757
Service workers0.5360.7130.5450.725
B: WITHOUT IMPUTATION
Overall Mean0.6100.7380.6250.732
Standard Deviation0.1170.0630.1150.062
Manager, Professionals, Technicians0.7990.7060.7770.685
Clerical support and sale workers0.6710.7440.6710.748
Plant and machines operators and assemblers0.5520.7720.5190.804
Agricultural, construction and transport workers0.5600.7370.5760.761
Service workers0.5360.7120.5440.725

[i] Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

[ii] Note: The information content index is computed as ICj=k=15Ijk23*Ljk13 where where k = work activities: Getting information, Processing information, Analyzing data or information, Interacting with computers, Documenting/Recording information. The automation content is de ned as ACj=l=15Fjl*Vjl where l = work context: Degree of automation, Importance of repeating same tasks, Structured versus unstructured work (reverse), Pace determined by speed of equipment, Spend time making repetitive motions. Task measures are normalized to range between zero and one.

Table 5

Percentage of Workers in the Top Quartile of Task Content Indexes by Major Occupation Group in 2005/2006 – 2014/2015 (with self selection correction)

Task Content IndexesPercentage of workersTechnology
InformationAutomation
2005MenWomenMenWomenMenWomen
Overall10010020252623
Manager, Professionals, Technicians1312878400
Clerical support and sale workers193145494856
Plant and machines operators and assemblers208205175
Agricultural, construction and transport workers361112027
Service workers13480020
2015
Overall10010021292316
Manager, Professionals, Technicians1315878210
Clerical support and sale workers203644482330
Plant and machines operators and assemblers206204969
Agricultural, construction and transport workers332102438
Service workers14420020

[i] Note: The numbers in each of the task content indexes columns indicate the percentage of workers in each major occupation by gender, which fall in the top 75 per cent of their category.

Table 6

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Female−0.141*** (0.005)−0.158*** (0.003)−0.327*** (0.004)−0.203*** (0.002)−0.237*** (0.002)−0.272*** (0.002)
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.136*** (0.009)0.105*** (0.009)0.080*** (0.006)−0.001 (0.005)−0.059*** (0.003)0.047*** (0.003)
Information content Q30.105*** (0.008)0.220*** (0.008)0.061*** (0.006)0.005 (0.004)0.004*** (0.001)−0.118*** (0.002)
Information content Q40.185*** (0.008)0.543*** (0.008)1.013*** (0.011)0.071*** (0.004)0.230*** (0.002)0.514*** (0.005)
Automation content Q2−0.010 (0.009)0.011 (0.009)−0.112*** (0.005)0.045*** (0.001)0.002 (0.002)−0.151*** (0.005)
Automation content Q30.205*** (0.009)0.281*** (0.009)−0.125*** (0.008)0.101*** (0.002)0.11*** (0.002)−0.093*** (0.003)
Automation content Q40.088*** (0.008)0.037*** (0.008)−0.304*** (0.007)0.1*** (0.003)0.045*** (0.003)−0.412*** (0.004)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.167*** (0.009)0.141*** (0.004)0.093*** (0.004)0.148*** (0.004)0.105*** (0.002)0.064*** (0.002)
From 10 to 12 years0.243*** (0.008)0.278*** (0.005)0.356*** (0.008)0.281*** (0.004)0.294*** (0.002)0.267*** (0.003)
From 13 to 15 years0.243*** (0.008)0.278*** (0.005)0.356*** (0.008)0.281*** (0.004)0.294*** (0.002)0.267*** (0.003)
16 and more years0.296*** (0.009)0.525*** (0.008)0.978*** (0.015)0.359*** (0.005)0.566*** (0.004)0.765*** (0.006)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<50.042*** (0.012)−0.079*** (0.014)−1.581*** (0.034)0.020*** (0.004)−0.099*** (0.009)−1.067*** (0.017)
5<experience<100.023** (0.010)−0.130*** (0.005)−0.670*** (0.009)−0.017*** (0.004)−0.119*** (0.003)−0.436*** (0.007)
10<experience<15−0.051*** (0.009)−0.116*** (0.004)−0.153*** (0.007)−0.046*** (0.004)−0.088*** (0.003)−0.128*** (0.003)
20<experience<250.035*** (0.009)0.102*** (0.004)0.118*** (0.006)0.031*** (0.003)0.031*** (0.004)0.074*** (0.005)
25<experience<300.075*** (0.008)0.144*** (0.003)0.213*** (0.007)0.034*** (0.004)0.067*** (0.003)0.132*** (0.003)
30<experience<350.056*** (0.008)0.16*** (0.005)0.232*** (0.007)0.049*** (0.004)0.089*** (0.003)0.202*** (0.004)
35<experience<400.113*** (0.010)0.176*** (0.006)0.222*** (0.005)0.055*** (0.005)0.086*** (0.003)0.195*** (0.003)
Experience>400.046*** (0.008)0.208*** (0.004)0.225*** (0.006)0.048*** (0.004)0.094*** (0.003)0.167*** (0.004
Nonmarried−0.073*** (0.005)−0.131*** (0.004)−0.149*** (0.003)−0.050*** (0.002)−0.101*** (0.002)−0.101*** (0.001)
Region−0.190*** (0.003)−0.161*** (0.003)−0.150*** (0.004)−0.086*** (0.002)−0.060*** (0.001)−0.059*** (0.001)
Informal−0.438*** (0.007)−0.244*** (0.005)−0.0220*** (0.006)−0.506*** (0.008)−0.196*** (0.003)0.001 (0.003)
Constant2.750*** (0.013)3.334*** (0.005)4.358*** (0.007)3.450*** (0.007)4.008*** (0.004)4.834*** (0.003)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 43,022; 2014/15: 45,063

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.34

Table 7

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Male Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.071*** (0.005)0.087*** (0.005)−0.075*** (0.007)−0.022** (0.009)0.010*** (0.003)0.111*** (0.004)
Information content Q30.031*** (0.006)0.081*** (0.004)0.007 (0.007)0.005 (0.005)−0.035*** (0.002)−0.133*** (0.003)
Information content Q40.14*** (0.006)0.45*** (0.006)1.112*** (0.011)0.026*** (0.006)0.163*** (0.002)0.474*** (0.008)
Automation content Q2−0.259*** (0.007)−0.147*** (0.004)−0.171*** (0.007)−0.050*** (0.003)−0.035*** (0.002)−0.096*** (0.004)
Automation content Q30.124*** (0.008)0.227*** (0.010)−0.142*** (0.010)0.057*** (0.003)0.129*** (0.003)−0.014*** (0.004)
Automation content Q40.009* (0.005)−0.019*** (0.005)0.008 (0.008)0.003 (0.003)−0.02*** (0.003)−0.326*** (0.003)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.193*** (0.007)0.164*** (0.004)0.101*** (0.007)0.173*** (0.005)0.112*** (0.002)0.096*** (0.003)
From 10 to 12 years0.274*** (0.007)0.331*** (0.005)0.460*** (0.010)0.269*** (0.004)0.311*** (0.002)0.345*** (0.004)
From 13 to 15 years0.328*** (0.012)0.535*** (0.009)1.257*** (0.031)0.353*** (0.006)0.524*** (0.005)0.899*** (0.008)
16 and more years0.312*** (0.005)0.649*** (0.007)2.751*** (0.032)0.403*** (0.006)0.691*** (0.004)1.953*** (0.012)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<5−0.024** (0.011)−0.090*** (0.015)−2.119*** (0.044)0.054*** (0.006)−0.077*** (0.015)−1.350*** (0.036)
5<experience<100.008 (0.012)−0.129*** (0.011)−0.916*** (0.017)−0.013*** (0.004)−0.128*** (0.005)−0.516*** (0.009)
10<experience<15−0.112*** (0.013)−0.138*** (0.006)−0.156*** (0.010)−0.039*** (0.004)−0.072*** (0.003)−0.147*** (0.006)
20<experience<250.046*** (0.009)0.108*** (0.007)0.131*** (0.008)0.053*** (0.004)0.06*** (0.003)0.096*** (0.005)
25<experience<300.075*** (0.007)0.147*** (0.004)0.26*** (0.008)0.065*** (0.003)0.094*** (0.004)0.156*** (0.005)
30<experience<350.074*** (0.008)0.159*** (0.006)0.192*** (0.010)0.073*** (0.003)0.128*** (0.001)0.204*** (0.005)
35<experience<400.096*** (0.010)0.153*** (0.007)0.202*** (0.008)0.092*** (0.004)0.129*** (0.004)0.243*** (0.005)
Experience>400.052*** (0.012)0.165*** (0.005)0.235*** (0.011)0.091*** (0.005)0.091*** (0.003)0.192*** (0.007)
Nonmarried−0.083*** (0.008)−0.159*** (0.003)−0.158*** (0.004)−0.071*** (0.002)−0.111*** (0.002)−0.134*** (0.003)
Region−0.108*** (0.004)−0.097*** (0.004)−0.147*** (0.007)−0.054*** (0.004)−0.016*** (0.002)−0.029*** (0.002)
Informal−0.484*** (0.011)−0.325*** (0.006)−0.017* (0.010)−0.515*** (0.008)−0.255*** (0.004)0.008 (0.006)
Constant2.853*** (0.008)3.458*** (0.007)4.327*** (0.011)3.504*** (0.007)4.021*** (0.004)4.725*** (0.007)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 21,852; 2014/15: 22,183

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

Table 8

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Female Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.132*** (0.019)0.069*** (0.005)−0.018** (0.007)0.065*** (0.009)0.004 (0.006)0.025*** (0.006)
Information content Q30.136*** (0.020)0.384*** (0.011)0.010 (0.010)0.008 (0.008)0.103*** (0.004)−0.107*** (0.006)
Information content Q40.602*** (0.016)0.607*** (0.007)0.886*** (0.008)0.103*** (0.008)0.374*** (0.005)0.587*** (0.005)
Automation content Q20.162*** (0.013)0.169*** (0.005)−0.068*** (0.006)0.078*** (0.008)0.098*** (0.005)−0.143*** (0.009)
Automation content Q30.171*** (0.024)0.178*** (0.010)−0.186*** (0.014)0.143*** (0.006)0.186*** (0.005)−0.211*** (0.007)
Automation content Q40.096*** (0.018)0.041*** (0.006)0.012 (0.011)0.006 (0.005)0.106*** (0.006)−0.487*** (0.009)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.176*** (0.015)0.115*** (0.011)0.043*** (0.008)0.133*** (0.007)0.07*** (0.003)0.019*** (0.005)
From 10 to 12 years0.285*** (0.017)0.248*** (0.011)0.18*** (0.011)0.31*** (0.008)0.313*** (0.004)0.138*** (0.004)
From 13 to 15 years0.352*** (0.018)0.492*** (0.012)0.705*** (0.021)0.39*** (0.010)0.581*** (0.005)0.599*** (0.009)
16 and more years0.364*** (0.018)0.648*** (0.011)1.857*** (0.020)0.424*** (0.010)0.74*** (0.004)1.712*** (0.013)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<50.138*** (0.027)−0.03* (0.016)−1.239*** (0.056)0.053*** (0.004)−0.082*** (0.009)−0.957*** (0.040)
5<experience<100.054*** (0.021)−0.09*** (0.007)−0.499*** (0.018)0.017** (0.007)−0.095*** (0.005)−0.372*** (0.010)
10<experience<15−0.003 (0.021)−0.074*** (0.006)−0.159*** (0.009)−0.011 (0.009)−0.081*** (0.005)−0.112*** (0.006)
20<experience<250.048*** (0.017)0.08*** (0.008)0.102*** (0.007)0.066*** (0.008)0.012* (0.007)0.044*** (0.009)
25<experience<300.105*** (0.020)0.118*** (0.009)0.117*** (0.006)0.056*** (0.007)0.056*** (0.008)0.085*** (0.006)
30<experience<350.092*** (0.015)0.121*** (0.009)0.16*** (0.009)0.079*** (0.008)0.066*** (0.007)0.183*** (0.009)
35<experience<400.134*** (0.018)0.149*** (0.006)0.154*** (0.005)0.078*** (0.011)0.06*** (0.007)0.137*** (0.008)
Experience>400.08*** (0.018)0.196*** (0.008)0.163*** (0.009)0.048*** (0.005)0.048*** (0.006)0.098*** (0.005)
Nonmarried−0.082*** (0.009)−0.078*** (0.004)−0.105*** (0.004)−0.04*** (0.003)−0.066*** (0.002)−0.076*** (0.003)
Region−0.266*** (0.008)−0.228*** (0.005)−0.164*** (0.005)−0.1*** (0.003)−0.109*** (0.002)−0.094*** (0.002)
Informal−0.451*** (0.022)−0.156*** (0.008)−0.085*** (0.007)−0.525*** (0.021)−0.131*** (0.006)−0.01** (0.005)
Constant2.508*** (0.036)3.107*** (0.008)4.251*** (0.008)3.179*** (0.013)3.63*** (0.007)4.706*** (0.011)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 21,170; 2014/15: 22,880

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

Figure 5

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects: Occupational Task. Forth vs First Quartile of Task Content. Dependent variable: log hourly wages. 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. Figures show the UQPE of the task indexes for the upper quartile when the bottom quartile is omitted. ii. Information/Automation covariates are defined as category variables that indicate the degree of information/automation task content of the job. Four quartiles are considered. iii. 2005 in red, 2015 in blue. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure 6

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects: Selected Education Covariates (Dummy 6 Years of Schooling omitted). Dependent variable: log hourly wages. 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. Figures show the UQPE of educational dummies, six years of education or less is omitted. ii. 2005 in red, 2015 in blue. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure 7

Aggregated decomposition of log hourly wages changes, 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. Figures show the total change of wages by gender, as well as the aggregated decomposition into the structure and the composition effect. RIF-regression method is used to perform the decomposition. Covariates include: Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status. ii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Table 9

Aggregate Decomposition of wage change between 2005 and 2015

90–1090–5050–10
A. All
Total Change−0.453*** (0.004)−0.255*** (0.002)−0.197*** (0.002)
Composition−0.066*** (0.003)−0.067*** (0.002)0.001 (0.002)
Structure−0.387*** (0.003)−0.188*** (0.002)−0.198*** (0.003)
B. Males
Total Change−0.582*** (0.005)−0.34*** (0.002)−0.242*** (0.004)
Composition−0.02*** (0.002)−0.015*** (0.002)−0.005*** (0.002)
Structure−0.562*** (0.005)−0.326*** (0.002)−0.236*** (0.004)
C. Females
Total Change−0.418*** (0.012)−0.184*** (0.004)−0.233*** (0.009)
Composition−0.052*** (0.01)−0.038*** (0.006)−0.014** (0.006)
Structure−0.365*** (0.01)−0.146*** (0.006)−0.219*** (0.008)

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data. 32

Table 10

Detailed Decomposition of the composition effect, based on Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects

Inequality measureAllMalesFemales
90-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-10
Female−0.002*** (0.00007)−0.002*** (0.00005)−0.00016*** (0.00004)
Information0.018*** (0.0009)0.000 (0.0007)0.018*** (0.0005)0.001 (0.0008)−0.005*** (0.0008)0.006*** (0.0006)0.040*** (0.002)0.003*** (0.001)0.037*** (0.001)
Automation−0.041*** (0.00146)−0.048*** (0.00087)0.007*** (0.0015)0.012*** (0.0008)0.00667*** (0.001)0.006*** (0.0009)−0.036*** (0.006)−0.03539*** (0.005)−0.00058 (0.005)
Education0.042*** (0.001)0.032*** (0.0007)0.011*** (0.0005)0.057*** (0.0018)0.045*** (0.0014)0.013*** (0.0012)0.019*** (0.001)0.015*** (0.001)0.004*** (0.001)
Experience−0.020*** (0.0003)−0.015*** (0.0003)−0.005*** (0.0002)−0.025*** (0.00054)−0.020*** (0.00051)−0.005*** (0.0003)−0.013*** (0.001)−0.010*** (0.001)−0.003*** (0.001)
Other−0.064*** (0.002)−0.035*** (0.001)−0.030*** (0.001)−0.065*** (0.0018)−0.041*** (0.0015)−0.024*** (0.0013)−0.062*** (0.004)−0.010*** (0.002)−0.051*** (0.003)
Total Composition Effect−0.066*** (0.003)−0.067*** (0.002)0.001 (0.002)−0.020*** (0.0024)−0.015*** (0.0022)−0.005*** (0.0015)−0.052*** (0.01)−0.038*** (0.006)−0.014** (0.006)

*** p < 0.01,

** p < 0.05,

* p < 0.1.

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data.

Table 11

Detailed Decomposition of the structure effect, wage variation between 2005 and 2015, based on Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects

Inequality measureAllMalesFemales
90-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-10
Female0.063*** (0.0043)0.072*** (0.0032)−0.00909*** (0.0024)
Information−0.112*** (0.0086)−0.015** (0.0058)−0.09663*** (0.0071)−0.159*** (0.008)−0.08*** (0.006)−0.079*** (0.005)−0.062*** (0.018)0.012 (0.01)−0.074*** (0.017)
Automation−0.021** (0.01)0.012*** (0.0047)−0.03344*** (0.0078)−0.060*** (0.007)−0.009 (0.006)−0.051*** (0.005)−0.034** (0.016)−0.060*** (0.009)0.026** (0.013)
Education−0.121*** (0.0082)−0.103*** (0.0057)−0.01804*** (0.0049)−0.136*** (0.013)−0.114*** (0.009)−0.021** (0.009)−0.052*** (0.014)−0.073*** (0.01)0.021 (0.014)
Experience0.013** (0.0053)0.046*** (0.0057)−0.0334*** (0.0068)0.006 (0.008)0.037*** (0.008)−0.031*** (0.008)0.021 (0.014)0.052*** (0.009)−0.031*** (0.012)
Other0.015*** (0.0044)−0.003 (0.0035)0.01813*** (0.0044)0.040*** (0.005)0.005 (0.003)0.035*** (0.004)−0.023** (0.011)−0.008 (0.006)−0.014 (0.01)
Constant−0.224*** (0.0176)−0.198*** (0.0075)−0.02593 (0.0177)−0.253*** (0.014)−0.165*** (0.014)−0.089*** (0.012)−0.216*** (0.043)−0.068*** (0.015)−0.148*** (0.037)
Total Structure Effect−0.387*** (0.0033)−0.188*** (0.0016)−0.1984*** (0.0026)−0.562*** (0.005)−0.326*** (0.002)−0.236*** (0.004)−0.365*** (0.01)−0.146*** (0.006)−0.219*** (0.008)

*** p < 0.01,

** p < 0.05,

* p < 0.1.

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data.

Figure 8

Log-hourly wages gender gap, 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. The gender gap is calculated by subtracting men’s wages minus women’s wages. ii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied. iii. Estimates of the gender gap without correction for self-selection are reported in the Supplementary Appendix.

Figure 9

Log-hourly wages gender gap variation between 2005 and 2015, unconditional and after controlling for observed characteristics. With correction for selection bias.

Notes: i. Figures correspond to the estimation of the variation of the gender gap using an approach analogous to the diff in diff estimator. Unconditional stands for the estimation without any controls. Figure (a) compares the unconditional variation of the gap with respect to that which control for all selected characteristics (Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status). Figures (b) to (e) compares the model with all regressors with those excluding indicated variables. iii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure 10

Aggregated decomposition of the gender wage gap and the gender gap change.

Notes: i. Figure (a) shows the aggregated composition and structure effects of gender wage gap in 2005 and 2015. Covariates include: Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status. ii. Figure (b) decompose gender wage gap change between 2005 and 2015 into the aggregated composition, structure and interaction effects, as defined in section 6) iii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure 11

Detailed decomposition of the gender gap change

Notes: Figures show the composition, structure and total effects of covariates Information, Automation and Education to the change of the gender wage gap between 2005 and 2015 as defined in section 6). ii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Table A1

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression (Without correction for selection bias)

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Female−0.141*** (0.001)−0.166*** (0.001)−0.337*** (0.002)−0.210*** (0.001)−0.234*** (0.0005)−0.284*** (0.001)
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.143*** (0.001)0.097*** (0.001)0.0190*** (0.001)0.009*** (0.001)−0.089*** (0.001)−0.033*** (0.001)
Information content Q30.108*** (0.001)0.2190*** (0.001)−0.026*** (0.001)−0.009*** (0.001)0.024*** (0.001)−0.044*** (0.001)
Information content Q40.166*** (0.001)0.512*** (0.001)0.988*** (0.003)0.109*** (0.001)0.336*** (0.001)0.578*** (0.001)
Automation content Q2−0.017*** (0.001)−0.000 (0.001)−0.147*** (0.001)0.042*** (0.001)−0.030*** (0.001)−0.135*** (0.001)
Automation content Q30.192*** (0.001)0.217*** (0.001)−0.390*** (0.002)0.089*** (0.001)0.100*** (0.001)−0.014*** (0.001)
Automation content Q40.100*** (0.001)0.044*** (0.001)−0.192*** (0.002)0.098*** (0.001)0.019*** (0.001)−0.324*** (0.001)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.166*** (0.001)0.145*** (0.001)0.097*** (0.001)0.150*** (0.001)0.103*** (0.001)0.055*** (0.001)
From 10 to 12 years0.235*** (0.001)0.280*** (0.001)0.363*** (0.001)0.268*** (0.001)0.259*** (0.001)0.215*** (0.001)
From 13 to 15 years0.235*** (0.001)0.280*** (0.001)0.363*** (0.001)0.268*** (0.001)0.259*** (0.001)0.215*** (0.001)
16 and more years0.280*** (0.001)0.541*** (0.001)0.954*** (0.004)0.331*** (0.001)0.49*** (0.001)0.659*** (0.002)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<50.027*** (0.002)−0.090*** (0.002)−1.658*** (0.009)0.015*** (0.001)−0.112*** (0.001)−1.096*** (0.005)
5<experience<100.022*** (0.001)−0.134*** (0.001)−0.662*** (0.003)−0.015*** (0.001)−0.124*** (0.001)−0.435*** (0.002)
10<experience<15−0.057*** (0.001)−0.123*** (0.001)−0.154*** (0.001)−0.046*** (0.001)−0.089*** (0.001)−0.13*** (0.001)
20<experience<250.019*** (0.001)0.099*** (0.001)0.123*** (0.002)0.022*** (0.001)0.026*** (0.001)0.077*** (0.001)
25<experience<300.058*** (0.001)0.142*** (0.001)0.223*** (0.002)0.023*** (0.001)0.057*** (0.001)0.134*** (0.001)
30<experience<350.050*** (0.002)0.160*** (0.001)0.234*** (0.002)0.034*** (0.001)0.077*** (0.001)0.198*** (0.001)
35<experience<400.100*** (0.001)0.178*** (0.001)0.220*** (0.002)0.041*** (0.001)0.077*** (0.001)0.197*** (0.001)
Experience>400.032*** (0.001)0.202*** (0.001)0.234*** (0.002)0.027*** (0.001)0.076*** (0.001)0.155*** (0.001)
Nonmarried−0.082*** (0.001)−0.146*** (0.001)−0.157*** (0.001)−0.0550*** (0.001)−0.099*** (0.0004)−0.095*** (0.001)
Region−0.198*** (0.001)−0.159*** (0.001)−0.150*** (0.001)−0.088*** (0.001)−0.058*** (0.0004)−0.065*** (0.001)
Informal−0.480*** (0.001)−0.239*** (0.001)0.004*** (0.001)−0.550*** (0.001)−0.185*** (0.001)0.038*** (0.001)
Constant2.775*** (0.002)3.351*** (0.001)4.425*** (0.002)3.476*** (0.001)4.041*** (0.001)4.819*** (0.001)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 38,522; 2014/15: 41,893

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

Table A2

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Male Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression (Without correction for selection bias)

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.021*** (0.001)0.064*** (0.001)0.067*** (0.001)−0.072*** (0.001)−0.042*** (0.001)−0.070*** (0.001)
Information content Q30.033*** (0.001)0.030*** (0.002)0.001 (0.001)0.001 (0.001)−0.002* (0.001)−0.023*** (0.001)
Information content Q40.479*** (0.001)0.124*** (0.001)0.390*** (0.001)0.322*** (0.001)0.106*** (0.001)0.296*** (0.001)
Automation content Q2−0.199*** (0.001)−0.281*** (0.002)−0.160*** (0.001)−0.066*** (0.001)−0.072*** (0.001)−0.049*** (0.001)
Automation content Q30.017*** (0.001)0.104*** (0.001)0.179*** (0.001)0.062*** (0.001)0.032*** (0.001)0.122*** (0.001)
Automation content Q4−0.044*** (0.002)0.017*** (0.001)0.001 (0.001)0.001 (0.001)0.012*** (0.001)−0.007*** (0.001)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.162*** (0.001)0.188*** (0.001)0.167*** (0.001)0.118*** (0.001)0.175*** (0.001)0.106*** (0.001)
From 10 to 12 years0.336*** (0.001)0.272*** (0.002)0.332*** (0.001)0.27*** (0.001)0.258*** (0.001)0.272*** (0.001)
From 13 to 15 years0.619*** (0.002)0.317*** (0.002)0.543*** (0.002)0.487*** (0.001)0.307*** (0.001)0.435*** (0.001)
16 and more years1.070*** (0.002)0.321*** (0.002)0.678*** (0.002)0.88*** (0.001)0.334*** (0.001)0.573*** (0.001)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<5−0.578*** (0.003)−0.029*** (0.004)−0.086*** (0.004)−0.44*** (0.002)0.046*** (0.001)−0.0850*** (0.002)
5<experience<10−0.303*** (0.001)−0.000 (0.002)−0.135*** (0.002)−0.218*** (0.001)−0.013*** (0.001)−0.131*** (0.001)
10<experience<15−0.133*** (0.001)−0.100*** (0.002)−0.146*** (0.001)−0.087*** (0.001)−0.039*** (0.001)−0.079*** (0.001)
20<experience<250.089*** (0.001)0.037*** (0.002)0.107*** (0.001)0.056*** (0.001)0.052*** (0.001)0.054*** (0.001)
25<experience<300.152*** (0.001)0.075*** (0.002)0.136*** (0.001)0.099*** (0.001)0.051*** (0.001)0.085*** (0.001)
30<experience<350.156*** (0.001)0.075*** (0.002)0.155*** (0.001)0.133*** (0.001)0.064*** (0.001)0.116*** (0.001)
35<experience<400.157*** (0.001)0.091*** (0.002)0.147*** (0.001)0.128*** (0.001)0.083*** (0.001)0.113*** (0.001)
Experience>400.154*** (0.001)0.043*** (0.002)0.156*** (0.001)0.11*** (0.001)0.11*** (0.001)0.089*** (0.001)
Nonmarried−0.139*** (0.001)−0.087*** (0.001)−0.169*** (0.001)−0.100*** (0.001)−0.072*** (0.001)−0.114*** (0.001)
Region−0.119*** (0.001)−0.104*** (0.001)−0.102*** (0.001)−0.026*** (0.0005)−0.054*** (0.001)−0.016*** (0.001)
Informal−0.302*** (0.001)−0.506*** (0.002)−0.331*** (0.001)−0.276*** (0.001)−0.555*** (0.002)−0.243*** (0.001)
Constant3.566*** (0.001)2.866*** (0.002)3.483*** (0.002)4.092*** (0.001)3.528*** (0.001)4.045*** (0.001)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 20,330; 2014/15: 21,075

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

Table A3

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects on Female Log Wages (2005 – 2015) - RIF Regression (Without correction for selection bias)

Year2005/062014/15
Covariates/Quantile105090105090
Task content indexes (1st. quartile omitted)
Information content Q20.169*** (0.002)0.078*** (0.001)−0.078*** (0.001)0.076*** (0.001)0.004*** (0.001)−0.076*** (0.001)
Information content Q30.156*** (0.003)0.438*** (0.002)0.0030 (0.003)0.002 (0.001)0.140*** (0.001)0.009*** (0.002)
Information content Q40.601*** (0.002)0.644*** (0.002)0.851*** (0.003)0.082*** (0.001)0.433*** (0.001)0.620*** (0.002)
Automation content Q20.172*** (0.002)0.190*** (0.001)−0.078*** (0.001)0.092*** (0.001)0.065*** (0.001)−0.121*** (0.002)
Automation content Q30.175*** (0.002)0.130*** (0.001)−0.481*** (0.003)0.141*** (0.001)0.162*** (0.001)−0.105*** (0.001)
Automation content Q40.080*** (0.002)0.056*** (0.001)0.003 (0.003)0.001 (0.001)0.066*** (0.001)−0.446*** (0.002)
Education (6 years or less omitted)
From 7 to 9 years0.193*** 3241(0.002)0.108*** (0.001)0.051*** (0.001)0.134*** (0.001)0.075*** (0.001)0.021*** (0.001)
From 10 to 12 years0.290*** (0.002)0.257*** (0.001)0.192*** (0.001)0.308*** (0.001)0.301*** (0.001)0.095*** (0.001)
From 13 to 15 years0.346*** (0.002)0.508*** (0.002)0.664*** (0.004)0.392*** (0.001)0.563*** (0.001)0.524*** (0.002)
16 and more years0.366*** (0.002)0.687*** (0.002)1.8*** (0.007)0.437*** (0.001)0.705*** (0.001)1.608*** (0.004)
Experience (15<Experience<20 omitted)
Experience<50.112*** (0.003)−0.045*** (0.003)−1.325*** (0.011)0.042*** (0.001)−0.093*** (0.001)−0.980*** (0.007)
5<experience<100.056*** (0.002)−0.103*** (0.002)−0.467*** (0.004)0.027*** (0.001)−0.087*** (0.001)−0.374*** (0.002)
10<experience<15−0.004** (0.002)−0.075*** (0.001)−0.15*** (0.002)−0.004*** (0.001)−0.081*** (0.001)−0.120*** (0.002)
20<experience<250.020*** (0.002)0.093*** (0.001)0.097*** (0.003)0.065*** (0.001)0.010*** (0.001)0.044*** (0.002)
25<experience<300.087*** (0.002)0.13*** (0.001)0.126*** (0.003)0.050*** (0.001)0.054*** (0.001)0.088*** (0.001)
30<experience<350.078*** (0.002)0.126*** (0.001)0.182*** (0.003)0.059*** (0.001)0.056*** (0.001)0.188*** (0.002)
35<experience<400.132*** (0.002)0.156*** (0.001)0.144*** (0.003)0.068*** (0.001)0.051*** (0.001)0.153*** (0.002)
Experience>400.051*** (0.003)0.215*** (0.002)0.171*** (0.002)0.042*** (0.001)0.042*** (0.001)0.108*** (0.001)
Nonmarried−0.093*** (0.001)−0.088*** (0.001)−0.11*** (0.001)−0.045*** (0.001)−0.076*** (0.001)−0.086*** (0.001)
Region−0.291*** (0.001)−0.242*** (0.001)−0.167*** (0.001)−0.110*** (0.001)−0.113*** (0.001)−0.093*** (0.001)
Informal−0.487*** (0.002)−0.158*** (0.001)−0.056*** (0.001)−0.541*** (0.002)−0.114*** (0.001)0.006*** (0.001)
Constant2.515*** (0.003)3.072*** (0.002)4.307*** (0.003)3.193*** (0.002)3.659*** (0.001)4.689*** (0.002)

Notes: Bootstrapped standard errors are in parenthesis (200 replications of the entire procedure).

Number of observations 2005/2006: 18,192; 2014/15: 20,818

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data and O*NET.

Table A4

Aggregate Decomposition of wage change between 2005 and 2015 (without selection correction)

90-1090-5050-10
A. All
Total Change−0.457*** (0.001)−0.284*** (0.001)−0.173*** (0.001)
Composition−0.118*** (0.001)−0.119*** (0.001)0.001 (0.001)
Structure−0.339*** (0.001)−0.165*** (0.001)−0.174*** (0.001)
B. Males
Total Change−0.555*** (0.002)−0.346*** (0.001)−0.208*** (0.001)
Composition−0.001 (0.001)−0.001 (0.001)0 (0.001)
Structure−0.553*** (0.002)−0.345*** (0.001)−0.208*** (0.001)
C. Females
Total Change−0.415*** (0.002)−0.243*** (0.001)−0.172*** (0.001)
Composition−0.147*** (0.001)−0.150*** (0.001)0.003*** (0.001)
Structure−0.268*** (0.002)−0.093*** (0.001)−0.176*** (0.001)

*** p<0.01,

** p<0.05,

* p<0.1

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data. 32

Table A5

Detailed Decomposition of the composition effect, based on Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects (without selection correction)

Inequality measureAllMalesFemales
90-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-10
Female−0.002*** (0.00003)−0.002*** (0.00003)−0.00024*** (0.00001)
Information0.008*** (0.0004)−0.022*** (0.0003)0.03*** (0.0003)0.018*** (0.0005)0.01*** (0.0004)0.008*** (0.0003)0.039*** (0.0008)−0.039*** (0.0007)0.077*** (0.0006)
Automation−0.072*** (0.00033)−0.073*** (0.00032)0.001*** (0.00023)0.018*** (0.0003)0.00853*** (0.0003)0.009*** (0.0002)−0.117*** (0.0013)−0.09796*** (0.0011)−0.019*** (0.0008)
Education0.043*** (0.0004)0.03*** (0.0003)0.012*** (0.0002)0.057*** (0.0006)0.044*** (0.0005)0.013*** (0.0002)0.018*** (0.0005)0.013*** (0.0003)0.005*** (0.0003)
Experience−0.02*** (0.0002)−0.015*** (0.00013)−0.005*** (0.0001)−0.025*** (0.00027)−0.02*** (0.00024)−0.005*** (0.0001)−0.014*** (0.00021)−0.01*** (0.00018)−0.003*** (0.0001)
Other−0.075*** (0.00034)−0.038*** (0.00021)−0.037*** (0.00029)−0.07*** (0.0004)−0.043*** (0.0003)−0.026*** (0.0003)−0.073*** (0.0006)−0.016*** (0.0003)−0.057*** (0.0005)
Total Composition Effect−0.118*** (0.001)−0.119*** (0.001)0.001 (0.001)−0.001 (0.001)−0.001 (0.0008)−0.000 (0.0006)−0.147*** (0.0015)−0.150*** (0.0012)0.003*** (0.0009)

*** p < 0.01,

** p < 0.05,

* p < 0.1.

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data. 32.

Table A6

Detailed Decomposition of the structure effect, wage variation between 2005 and 2015, based on UQPE (without selection correction)

Inequality measureAllMalesFemales
90-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-1090-1090-5050-10
Female0.066*** (0.0012)0.066*** (0.0012)0.00048 (0.0007)
Information−0.048*** (0.0016)0.018*** (0.0013)−0.06594*** (0.0013)−0.108*** (0.002)−0.065*** (0.002)−0.043*** (0.001)0.051*** (0.003)0.082*** (0.003)−0.030*** (0.002)
Automation0.078*** (0.002)0.110*** (0.0016)−0.03173*** (0.0012)0.017*** (0.003)0.047*** (0.002)−0.030*** (0.002)0.082*** (0.003)0.077*** (0.002)0.005*** (0.002)
Education−0.151*** (0.0021)−0.103*** (0.0018)−0.04793*** (0.0016)−0.166*** (0.003)−0.119*** (0.002)−0.047*** (0.002)−0.076*** (0.003)−0.087*** (0.002)0.011*** (0.002)
Experience0.007*** (0.002)0.047*** (0.0018)−0.03913*** (0.0014)−0.003 (0.003)0.028*** (0.002)−0.031*** (0.002)0.009*** (0.003)0.059*** (0.003)−0.051*** (0.002)
Other0.015*** (0.0012)−0.006*** (0.0009)0.02106*** (0.001)0.052*** (0.002)0.008*** (0.001)0.043*** (0.001)−0.038*** (0.002)−0.02*** (0.001)−0.018*** (0.001)
Constant−0.307*** (0.0042)−0.297*** (0.0036)−0.01043*** (0.003)−0.345*** (0.006)−0.244*** (0.005)−0.1*** (0.004)−0.296*** (0.006)−0.204*** (0.005)−0.092*** (0.005)
Total Structure Efect−0.339*** (0.001)−0.165*** (0.0009)−0.17362*** (0.0006)−0.553*** (0.002)−0.345*** (0.001)−0.208*** (0.001)−0.268*** (0.002)−0.093*** (0.001)−0.176*** (0.001)

*** p < 0.01,

** p < 0.05,

* p < 0.1.

Source: Compiled by authors based on ECH 2005, 2006 and 2014, 2015 data. 32.

Figure A1

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects: Other Covariates. Dependent variable: log hourly wages. 2005 and 2015

Notes: 2005 in red, 2015 in blue. Solid lines are point estimates, dashes lines report the lower and upper bound of the 95th confidence interval.

Figure A2

Log-hourly wages gender gap variation between 2005 and 2015, unconditional and after controlling for observed characteristics. Without correction for selection bias.

Notes: i. Figures correspond to the estimation (not corrected for self selection) of the variation of the gender gap using an approach analogous to the diff in diff estimator. Unconditional stands for the estimation without any controls. Figure (a) compares the unconditional variation of the gap with respect to that which control for all selected characteristics (Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status). Figures (b) to (e) compares the model with all regressors with those excluding indicated variables. iii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure A3

Unconditional Quantile Partial Effects: Forth vs First Quartile of Information Task Content, two definition of the variable. Dependent variable: log hourly wages. 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. Figures show the UQPE of the information task using two alternative indexes, as well as using non imputed data for unemployed, for the upper quartile when the bottom quartile is omitted. ii. In red 2005 in blue 2015. iii. Definition 1 gives Cobb-Douglas weight of two-thirds to importance and one-third to level. In definition 2 we calculated this index by giving one-third to the former and two-thirds to the latter.iv. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure A4

Aggregated decomposition of log hourly wages changes, 2005 and 2015.

Notes: i. Figures show the total change of wages by gender, as well as the aggregated decomposition into the structure and the composition effect. RIF-regression method is used to perform the decomposition. Covariates include: Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status. ii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure A5

Aggregated decomposition of the gender wage gap and the gender gap change.

Notes: i. Figure (a) shows the aggregated composition and structure effects of gender wage gap in 2005 and 2015.

Covariates include: Information, Automation, Education, Experience, Informal worker, Region and Marital status. ii. Figure (b) decompose gender wage gap change between 2005 and 2015 into the aggregated composition, structure and interaction effects, as defined in section 6) iii. Solid lines are point estimates, dashed lines indicate the lower and upper bound of the 95 confidence interval. Bootstrapped standard errors are calculated (200 replicates) within each 10 imputed data sets and then Rubin’s rules are applied.

Figure A6

Detailed decomposition of the gender gap change.

Language: English
Submitted on: May 5, 2022
Published on: Dec 31, 2023
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
JEL:

© 2023 Sandra Rodríguez López, Graciela Sanroman, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.