The detailed analysis of family gap in Russia. The Heckman selection model and the fixed effects model. Negative correlation of presence of children and mother’s earnings in Russia. Providing mothers with family services and other job amenities.
Аннотация к работе
Международный институт экономики и финансов МАГИСТЕРСКАЯ ДИССЕРТАЦИЯ на тему: «Плата за материнство: изменение заработной платы при рождении ребенка в России / Family gap in Russia» Выполнил: Студент 2 курса магистратуры Ширяева МарияИсследование главным образом посвящено такому отрицательному фактору, как значительное изменение заработной платы женщины с ребенком в сравнении с ее бездетными коллегами. Цель нашей работы заключается в том, чтобы обозначить наличие в современном российском обществе зависимости заработной платы от наличия у женщины детей, а так же от их количества. В качестве метода исследования был выбран анализ на основе моделей МНК, Хекмана и модели с фиксированными эффектами. В результате эксперимента с использованием моделей МНК нами было выявлено, что женщины с одним ребенком зарабатывают на 6% меньше, чем женщины без детей; а женщины с двумя детьми - на 9%. Однако в ходе дальнейшего исследования с использованием модели Хекмана оказалось, что эта разница недооценена как минимум на 2%, в то время как для женщин с тремя детьми и более эта разница стала значимой (4%).But one of the main reasons contributing to the gender pay gap is the family gap, that is earnings differential between mothers and non-mothers. The main ones are supposed to be as follows: ? Discrimination in the workplace: employers behave differently to women with children or women anticipating to have a child. Employers might discriminate mothers retuned from maternity leaves as they anticipate less productiveness and effectiveness from women with children. The authors obtained the following results: 3% of family gap for mothers with one child and 6% for those who are with two or more children. Petersburg and zero otherwise, - EXP is number of years of working experience, - CHILD_LESS_3M - CHILD_LESS_7 is an indicator that a woman has children less than 3 month, 1.5, 3, 7 years old, - CHILD_LESS_18 is a number of children less than 18 years old, - ONE_CHILD - THREE_MORE_CHILD are indicators representing a presence of one, two, three or more children, - LEAVE is a dummy variable showing whether a woman is on a maternity leave, 4 Davies R., Pierre G.This paper was aimed to found out if there is a motherhood wage penalty in Russia, reveal other factors having a negative effect on mother’s earnings and identify the size of family gap. Having conducted this investigation based on RLMS data set OLS and Heckman models results revealed the presence of family gap in Russia. OLS model results in statistically significant 6% penalty for women with one child, while women with two children suffer from motherhood penalty of 9%. However, after accounting for unobserved heterogeneity using Heckman selection model, the estimates increased by 2% for women with one child and by 3% for women with two children; while wage penalty for mothers with three or more children became statistically significant (4%). For instance, home-centered women might also prefer having children thereby contributing negatively to family gap.
Вывод
This paper was aimed to found out if there is a motherhood wage penalty in Russia, reveal other factors having a negative effect on mother’s earnings and identify the size of family gap.
Having conducted this investigation based on RLMS data set OLS and Heckman models results revealed the presence of family gap in Russia. The size and significance of the motherhood penalties vary depending on the number of children. OLS model results in statistically significant 6% penalty for women with one child, while women with two children suffer from motherhood penalty of 9%.
However, after accounting for unobserved heterogeneity using Heckman selection model, the estimates increased by 2% for women with one child and by 3% for women with two children; while wage penalty for mothers with three or more children became statistically significant (4%). The estimates of selection equation excluded some possible cases of spurious correlation related to educational level and location (rural/urban).
Next, we tried to control for individual effects by using fixed effects regression. However, this model has its disadvantages that emerge when using unbalanced panel data and the sample is small due to restrictions applied according to research’s purposes. Therefore, it didn’t give any significant results since the RLMS data source is not appropriate for applying this approach.
Hence, even after taking into consideration a large number of observables there remained unexplained part and uncertainty associated with the family gap. That is, we can’t state exactly the size of family gap in Russia as our sample didn’t enable us to control for individual characteristics. For instance, home-centered women might also prefer having children thereby contributing negatively to family gap. The issue of unobserved individual effects is left for future consideration and analysis. One of probable solutions to problem with fixed effects model is extension of sample or omitting less important variables that contain many gaps thereby reducing the sample size.
We suppose that the revealed negative correlation of women’s earnings and presence of children might also arise due to lack of necessary child care policies in Russia. There’re a lot of studies providing evidence of great impact of such policies on social and economic position in the countries. Cross-country study conducted by Davies and Pierre (2005) proves this theory by revealing greatest family wage gaps in countries with underdeveloped family services (e.g., Germany) and, on the contrary, small or no penalties for countries with family-friendly policies (e.g., Italy and France) providing mothers with facilities related to
31 childbirths. It leads to a conclusion of necessity to introduce day care institutions and other childcare facilities to enable mothers to choose work without strong restrictions. These policies should be developed after more deep analysis of the family gap in future studies.
32
Список литературы
Anderson, D. J., Binder, M., & Krause, K. (2002). The motherhood wage penalty revisited: Experience, heterogeneity, work effort, and work-schedule flexibility.Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 56(2), 273-294.
Anderson, D. J., Binder, M., & Krause, K. (2002). The motherhood wage penalty: Which mothers pay it and why?. American economic review, 354-358.
Becker, G. S. (1985). Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor.Journal of labor economics, S33-S58.
Becker, G. S., & Becker, G. S. (2009). A Treatise on the Family. Harvard university press.
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2000). Gender differences in pay (No. w7732). National bureau of economic research.
Blossfeld, H.P., Drobnic, S., 2001. A cross-national comparative approach to couples’ careers. In: Blossfeld, H.P., Drobnic, S. (Eds.), Careers of couples in contemporary societies. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001). The wage penalty for motherhood. American sociological review, 204-225.
Davies, R., & Pierre, G. (2005). The family gap in pay in Europe: A cross-country study. Labour Economics, 12(4), 469-486.
Gerry, C. J., Kim, B. Y., & Li, C. A. (2004). The gender wage gap and wage arrears in
Russia: Evidence from the RLMS. Journal of Population Economics,17(2), 267-288.
Hardoy, I., & Schone, P. (2008). The family gap and family friendly policies: the case of Norway. Applied Economics, 40(22), 2857-2871.
33
Harkness S. and Waldfogel J., (1999), “The Family Gap in Pay : Evidence from seven
Industrialized Countries”, London School of Economics, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE), Paper 29, November
Heckman, J. J. (1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. In Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4(pp. 475-492). NBER.
Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error.Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 153-161.
Lee, L. F. (1978). Unionism and wage rates: A simultaneous equations model with qualitative and limited dependent variables. International economic review, 415-433.
Mincer, J., & Ofek, H. (1982). Interrupted work careers: Depreciation and restoration of human capital. Journal of human resources, 3-24.
Nielsen, H. S., Simonsen, M., & Verner, M. (2004). Does the Gap in Family?friendly Policies
Drive the Family Gap?*. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106(4), 721-744.
Slonimczyk, F., & Yurko, A. V. (2013). Assessing the impact of the maternity capital policy in Russia using a dynamic model of fertility and employment.
Waldfogel, J. (1997). The effect of children on women"s wages. American sociological review, 209-217.
Waldfogel, J. (1998). The family gap for young women in the United States and Britain: Can maternity leave make a difference?. Journal of labor economics,16(3), 505-545.