-
Inequality at risk of automation? Gender differences in routine tasks intensity in developing country labor markets
Authors:
Janneke Pieters,
Ana Kujundzic,
Rulof Burger,
Joel Gondwe
Abstract:
Technological change can have profound impacts on the labor market. Decades of research have made it clear that technological change produces winners and losers. Machines can replace some types of work that humans do, while new technologies increase human's productivity in other types of work. For a long time, highly educated workers benefitted from increased demand for their labor due to skill-bi…
▽ More
Technological change can have profound impacts on the labor market. Decades of research have made it clear that technological change produces winners and losers. Machines can replace some types of work that humans do, while new technologies increase human's productivity in other types of work. For a long time, highly educated workers benefitted from increased demand for their labor due to skill-biased technological change, while the losers were concentrated at the bottom of the wage distribution (Katz and Autor, 1999; Goldin and Katz, 2007, 2010; Kijima, 2006). Currently, however, labor markets seem to be affected by a different type of technological change, the so-called routine-biased technological change (RBTC). This chapter studies the risk of automation in developing country labor markets, with a particular focus on differences between men and women. Given the pervasiveness of gender occupational segregation, there may be important gender differences in the risk of automation. Understanding these differences is important to ensure progress towards equitable development and gender inclusion in the face of new technological advances. Our objective is to describe the gender gap in the routine task intensity of jobs in developing countries and to explore the role of occupational segregation and several worker characteristics in accounting for the gender gap.
△ Less
Submitted 10 April, 2025;
originally announced April 2025.
-
Consistent Segregation Metrics: Addressing Structural Variations in Global Labor Markets
Authors:
Ana Kujundzic,
Janneke Pieters
Abstract:
The Index of Dissimilarity (ID), widely utilized in economic literature as a measure of segregation, is inadequate for cross-country or time series studies due to its failure to account for structural variations across countries' labor markets or changes over time within a single country's labor market. Building on the works of Karmel and MacLachlan (1988) and Blackburn et al. (1993), we propose a…
▽ More
The Index of Dissimilarity (ID), widely utilized in economic literature as a measure of segregation, is inadequate for cross-country or time series studies due to its failure to account for structural variations across countries' labor markets or changes over time within a single country's labor market. Building on the works of Karmel and MacLachlan (1988) and Blackburn et al. (1993), we propose a new measure - the standardized ID - that isolates structural differences from true differences in segregation across space or time. A key advantage of our proposed measure lies in its ease of implementation and interpretation, even when working with datasets encompassing a large number of countries or time periods. Moreover, our measure can be consistently applied in the case of lumpy sectors or occupations that account for a large fraction of the workforce. We illustrate the new measure in an analysis of the cross-country relationship between economic development (as measured by GDP per capita) and occupational and sectoral gender segregation. Comparing the crude ID with the standardized ID, we show that the crude ID overestimates the positive correlation between income and segregation, especially between low- and middle-income countries. This suggests that analyses relying on the crude ID risk overestimating the importance of income differentials in explaining cross-country variation in gender segregation.
△ Less
Submitted 4 March, 2025;
originally announced March 2025.
-
Educational Assortative Mating and Household Income Inequality: Evidence from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa
Authors:
Ana Kujundzic
Abstract:
This paper presents new empirical evidence from four emerging economies on the relationship between educational assortative mating and household income inequality. Using a methodological approach that allows for studying marital sorting patterns without imposing restrictive assumptions about search frictions, the study finds that people in Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa tend to sort i…
▽ More
This paper presents new empirical evidence from four emerging economies on the relationship between educational assortative mating and household income inequality. Using a methodological approach that allows for studying marital sorting patterns without imposing restrictive assumptions about search frictions, the study finds that people in Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa tend to sort into internally homogeneous marriages based on education level. While educational sorting has a noticeable impact on household income inequality in any given year, changes in the degree of sorting over time barely have any impact on inequality. Further analysis reveals that this counterintuitive result is due to different dynamics within educational groups. The inequality-decreasing impact from reduced sorting among the highly educated is almost entirely offset by the inequality-increasing impact from increased sorting among the least educated. While it is certainly reassuring that concerns about educational assortative mating having a potentially large effect on income disparities between households appear to be unwarranted, these findings suggest another concerning narrative. Marginalization processes are occurring at low levels of the educational distribution. The least educated are being left behind, facing limited labor market opportunities and diminished chances of achieving upward socioeconomic mobility through marriage to more educated partners.
△ Less
Submitted 4 March, 2025;
originally announced March 2025.
