For the purposes of my study, I utilized a longitudinal survey, the Chinese Health and Nutrition

survey, which includes a huge number of individuals from various geographic areas. The China
Health and Nutrition Survey (CHNS) includes numerous essential economic data, including earnings,
income levels, and so on. The survey includes information gathered in 1989, 1991, 1993, 1997, 2000,
2004, 2006, and 2009. For each survey year, the CHNS was conducted over the course of three days
utilizing a multistage, cluster-based random sampling technique to choose a sample of around 4,400
homes containing a total of 26,000 individuals in nine provinces. These persons are followed
throughout the survey years, barring death or household changes. Each year, more houses and
individuals are added to the survey to compensate for this loss.

However, not all samples provide the necessary data for our regression analysis. After eliminating
unsuitable samples, we have collected at least 1800 samples every survey year. Our sample contains
more men than women, reflecting China's larger labor market.

There are a number of benefits linked with this survey. The most recent data provided by the study
is from 2009, making it one of the most up-to-date sources of information compared to other
studies. The longitudinal nature of the study, which dates back to 1989, provides us with a thorough
assessment of market transition changes through time. Lastly, the entire analysis is based on a
sample of 26,000 geographically, economically, and culturally diverse individuals from nine
provinces.

Using a multiple regression with dependent variables and explanatory variables, I will investigate the
effects of various salary determinants. The dependent variable is the logarithm of the wage rate, and
the explanatory factors include a dummy variable X 1 that reflects the gender (1 for male and 0 for
female), the number of children a woman has, her degree of education, her occupation, and her
domestic work.

The multiple regression:

In(Wage)= β + β X + β In(number of children) + β In(education)
0 1 1 2 3

+ β In(occupation) + β In(domestic work) + e

4 5 i

Where, β0 is the intercept, and β , β , β ,and β

2 3 4 5

capture the effect of a woman's number of children, her level of education, the characteristics of her
career, and the amount of time she spends performing domestic duties, respectively.

I can discuss the influence of various explanatory variables on wage based on the analysis. And
ordinary least square (OLS) can be used to evaluate the salary effects of these variables.

Blinder - Decomposition of Oaxaca

The Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition (Blinder 1973; Oaxaca 1973) is a widely used technique for
analyzing the differences in group outcomes. The Oaxaca decomposition divides the wage disparity
between two groups into a component that is "explained" by group differences in productivity
characteristics, such as education or work experience, and a residual component that cannot be
explained by such differences. This "unexplained" portion is frequently employed as a discrimination
metric, but it also accounts for group differences in unobserved predictors. The standard Blinder-
Oaxaca decomposition is based on two distinct linear regression models for the groups A and B. X A
and XB are the mean vectors of the two groups' estimated coefficient vectors b A and bB. Both CA and
CB are constants.

YA = CA+XA bA
YB = Cb+XB bB

For these models, Blinder (1973) and Oaxaca (1973) propose the decomposition equations by
subtracting YA and YB then adding and subtracting XA bB and XB bA. So,

YA – YB= (XA - XB) bA + XB (bA - bB)+ (CA-CB)

Where, YA - YB is the mean difference in outcomes. In both equations, the first term on the right-
hand side represents the difference between the two groups in the outcome variable attributable to
variations in observable features. They represent the portion of the salary discrepancy attributable
to differences in average attributes between A and B, whilst the second and third terms represent
the differential attributable to differences in coefficient and constant estimations, respectively. It is
the unexplained discrepancy between Y A and YB. It could be the result of discrimination or factors
that were not included in the regression analysis.

Conclusion

Using the Chinese Health and Nutrition Study, a representative survey of China's population, this
paper indicates that since 1989, economic development has not been gender neutral. The gender
wage gap in China has expanded from 1989 to 2009 due to economic expansion and more
privatization. Since 1989, not only has the gender wage gap increased, but so has the unexplained
share of the disparity. The explained share of the wage gap has shrunk, indicating that differences in
labor characteristics between the sexes have shrunk. Consequently, the larger salary disparity can
only be explained by factors not considered in the research or by discrimination. Over time,
privatization has increased the gender wage disparity. The salary difference between men and
women is greater in the private sector than in the public sector. As more women enter the private
sector, the salary disparity widens overall. Men have a greater return for experience, working in
private enterprises, and profession type, and a lower negative effect for living in rural areas,
according to an analysis of the data.

Other factors not accounted for in this study can also influence the wage gap. Data on an individual's
organizational mobility and hierarchical position is a significant factor that may have a substantial
impact on the analysis. Even if two individuals belong to the same occupation type, the one with a
higher position in the work hierarchy may be compensated more. This is omitted from our analysis.

Additionally, the classification of occupational types may introduce error into the analysis. Different
occupations within the same occupational type may be compensated differently and should not be
grouped together. Even though both midwives and teachers are classified as Occupation 3, they may
be compensated very differently.

Additionally, industry data is lacking in the CHNS and not included in the study. Different industries
may pay people with comparable education, experience, etc. differently. There may also be wage
gaps between private and public enterprises within industries. In particular industries, discrimination
based on gender may be more prevalent in both private and public companies.

Moreover, statistics on marriage and children may potentially influence gender income disparities.
For instance, a woman with children may be paid less per hour since she is less motivated to
improve her job. These factors and categories could be used into future study on the gender wage
gap in China.

Discussion

While the gender wage gap has grown over time, the unexplained portion of the gap has also grown,
indicating that differences between gender characteristics have shrunk while other unexplained
factors, variables, and possible discrimination have grown. This is consistent with our descriptive
statistics, which indicate that differences between gender characteristics are diminishing. This
unexplained component of the salary disparity could be caused by the different returns females and
males obtain for the same labor qualities.

First of all, in Chart 4, we observe that private enterprises have a substantially higher gender wage
disparity than public ones. Since there are significant increase of men and women entering private
companies from 1989 to 2009, with around 50 percent population in private companies for both
genders in 2009, the increase in the unexplained portion of the gender wage gap can be partially
caused by the different returns men and women receive by entering the private sector.

Secondly, from the descriptive data we discover that men on average had more experience than
women for all surveyed years. Looking at regression 3 for all surveyed years, returns to experience
are all positive and remains pretty stable with a steep decrease in 2009. Consequently, men's wages
would be greater than women's if all other variables were held constant. This disparity can be
explained by distinguishing traits. Nonetheless, based on Regressions 6 and 7, we see that
experience yields a greater return for men in every year analyzed. While men's returns have
remained consistent with each passing year, women's returns have declined annually. In other
words, the disparity between men's and women's returns increases annually. Since exper2 is 0 for all
years, increasing experience increases compensation, but men receive a greater return than women.
This disparity is the result of prejudice. Rurality had a negative effect on hourly wage in general. The
effect varies between -0.07 and -0.1. Prior to the year 2000, both rural men and women earned
lower hourly salaries than their urban counterparts. After the year 2000, however, men in rural
areas were no longer punished for living there, but the rural coefficient for women increased
annually. Therefore, women in rural areas were punished more severely.

Throughout the survey years, the percentage wage return for women in each occupation type is
virtually always lower than for males. This was also supported by our descriptive statistics. For
statistically significant coefficients, the gap in gender-based returns grows annually. This may be due
to discrimination, or men may hold a higher hierarchical position than women within the same
career type.

Returns to education years become increasingly significant with time. Higher returns to schooling for
women should reduce the gender wage gap. However, this effect is mitigated by the returns to other
variables, as discussed previously.