{"title":"Wage gap between the State and non-State sectors in China: a study from the perspective of the Housing Provident Fund Scheme","authors":"Zimian He, Hua-dong Jiang, Panpan Gao","doi":"10.1080/0023656X.2023.2233909","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As an important component of China’s social security system, the housing provident fund (HPF) scheme has seen its fairness called into question. Based on the data from the China Household Finance Survey in 2017, this paper uses the least squares method and the unconditional quantile regression and decomposition method to study the wage gap between the state and non-state sectors from the perspective of the HPF. Its findings suggest that the HPF is an important component of the state-sector wage premium. That is, whether wages include the HPF affects the direction and significance of the sectoral wage gap. A closer look reveals that in the state sector, low-income workers benefit less from the HPF scheme than middle- and high-income workers. The breakdown of the wage gap within the state sector indicates that the wage premium for the middle- and high-income bracket and for the high-income bracket are mainly credited to the differences in individual characteristics of state-sector workers, while the wage premium obtained by the middle- and low-income bracket takes the form of the sectoral wage level, which benefits from the HPF system to some extent.","PeriodicalId":45777,"journal":{"name":"Labor History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Labor History","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656X.2023.2233909","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT As an important component of China’s social security system, the housing provident fund (HPF) scheme has seen its fairness called into question. Based on the data from the China Household Finance Survey in 2017, this paper uses the least squares method and the unconditional quantile regression and decomposition method to study the wage gap between the state and non-state sectors from the perspective of the HPF. Its findings suggest that the HPF is an important component of the state-sector wage premium. That is, whether wages include the HPF affects the direction and significance of the sectoral wage gap. A closer look reveals that in the state sector, low-income workers benefit less from the HPF scheme than middle- and high-income workers. The breakdown of the wage gap within the state sector indicates that the wage premium for the middle- and high-income bracket and for the high-income bracket are mainly credited to the differences in individual characteristics of state-sector workers, while the wage premium obtained by the middle- and low-income bracket takes the form of the sectoral wage level, which benefits from the HPF system to some extent.
期刊介绍:
Labor History is the pre-eminent journal for historical scholarship on labor. It is thoroughly ecumenical in its approach and showcases the work of labor historians, industrial relations scholars, labor economists, political scientists, sociologists, social movement theorists, business scholars and all others who write about labor issues. Labor History is also committed to geographical and chronological breadth. It publishes work on labor in the US and all other areas of the world. It is concerned with questions of labor in every time period, from the eighteenth century to contemporary events. Labor History provides a forum for all labor scholars, thus helping to bind together a large but fragmented area of study. By embracing all disciplines, time frames and locales, Labor History is the flagship journal of the entire field. All research articles published in the journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and refereeing by at least two anonymous referees.