Detailed Gender Wage Gap Decompositions: Controlling for Worker Unobserved Heterogeneity Using Network Theory

Jamie Fogel; Bernardo Modenesi

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2405.04365

Detailed Gender Wage Gap Decompositions: Controlling for Worker Unobserved Heterogeneity Using Network Theory

Jamie Fogel·Bernardo Modenesi

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Recent advances in the literature of decomposition methods in economics have allowed for the identification and estimation of detailed wage gap decompositions. In this context, building reliable counterfactuals requires using tighter controls to ensure that similar workers are correctly identified by making sure that important unobserved variables such as skills are controlled for, as well as comparing only workers with similar observable characteristics. This paper contributes to the wage decomposition literature in two main ways: (i) developing an economic principled network based approach to control for unobserved worker skills heterogeneity in the presence of potential discrimination; and (ii) extending existing generic decomposition tools to accommodate for potential lack of overlapping supports in covariates between groups being compared, which is likely to be the norm in more detailed decompositions. We illustrate the methodology by decomposing the gender wage gap in Brazil.

Explore related subjects

econ.EM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Jamie Fogel, Bernardo Modenesi. 2024-05-07. Detailed Gender Wage Gap Decompositions: Controlling for Worker Unobserved Heterogeneity Using Network Theory. https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.04365

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Evidence Aggregation for Treatment Choice

Consider a planner who has limited knowledge of the policy's causal impact on a certain local population of interest due to a lack of data, but does have access to the publicized intervention studies performed for similar policies on different populations. How should the planner make use of and aggregate this existing evidence to make her policy decision? Following Manski (2020; Towards Credible Patient-Centered Meta-Analysis, \textit{Epidemiology}), we formulate the planner's problem as a statistical decision problem with a social welfare objective, and solve for an optimal aggregation rule under the minimax-regret criterion. We investigate the analytical properties, computational feasibility, and welfare regret performance of this rule. We apply the minimax regret decision rule to decide whether to enact an active labor market policy based on 14 randomized control trial studies.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2026

Beta-Sorted Portfolios

Beta-sorted portfolios---portfolios comprised of assets with similar covariation with selected risk factors---are a popular tool in empirical finance to analyze models of (conditional) expected returns. Despite their widespread use, little is known of their econometric properties in contrast to comparable procedures such as two-pass regressions. We formally investigate the properties of beta-sorted portfolio returns by casting the procedure as a two-step nonparametric estimator with a nonparametric first step and a beta-adaptive portfolio construction. Our framework rationalizes the well-known estimation algorithm with precise economic and statistical assumptions on the general data-generating process. We provide conditions which ensure valid estimation and inference allowing for a range of hypotheses of interest in financial applications. We show that the rate of convergence of the estimator changes depending on the value of beta. We demonstrate that valid inference depends critically on the object of interest and discuss drawbacks of the widely used Fama-MacBeth variance estimator. To address these limitations, we propose a new variance estimator. We demonstrate the usefulness of our theoretical results in two empirical applications, including one in which we introduce a novel risk factor that captures the business credit cycle and show that it predicts both the cross-sectional and time-series behavior of U.S. stock returns.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2026

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM↗