Skip to main content

Table 5 Decomposition of changes in inequality measures from 2004/05 to 2011/12

From: Decomposition analysis of earnings inequality in rural India: 2004–2012

No industry and occupation controls
  90-10 50-10 90-50 Gini
Value in 2004/05 1.865*** 0.887*** 0.977*** 0.462***
(0.019) (0.017) (0.011) (0.002)
Value in 2011/12 1.575*** 0.791*** 0.784*** 0.396***
(0.017) (0.011) (0.015) (0.003)
Total change −0.290*** −0.096*** −0.194*** −0.066***
(0.025) (0.020) (0.019) (0.004)
Aggregate decomposition of total change
 Structure effect −0.406*** −0.105*** −0.301*** −0.095***
(0.027) (0.022) (0.019) (0.004)
 Composition effect 0.116*** 0.008 0.107*** 0.029***
(0.016) (0.006) (0.015) (0.002)
Detailed decomposition of the composition effect
 Education 0.100*** 0.010*** 0.090*** 0.024***
(0.011) (0.003) (0.011) (0.002)
 Experience 0.027*** 0.001 0.027*** 0.008***
(0.004) (0.003) (0.004) (0.001)
 Male −0.017*** −0.013*** −0.005*** −0.005***
(0.003) (0.003) (0.002) (0.001)
 States 0.003 0.009*** −0.006 0.002***
(0.004) (0.002) (0.004) (0.001)
 Married 0.003** 0.001 0.001* 0.001***
(0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.000)
 Caste −0.001 −0.001 −0.001 −0.001**
(0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.000)
 Muslim 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000
(0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.000)
Detailed decomposition of the structure effect
 Education −0.244*** −0.042 −0.203*** −0.030***
(0.034) (0.018) (0.030) (0.004)
 Experience −0.360 −0.172 −0.188 0.033
(0.222) (0.174) (0.161) (0.034)
 Male 0.055 −0.066 0.120*** −0.001
(0.052) (0.048) (0.027) (0.006)
 States −0.085 0.074 −0.159*** −0.007
(0.074) (0.053) (0.053) (0.014)
 Married −0.105** 0.010 −0.116*** −0.011*
(0.044) (0.032) (0.034) (0.006)
 Caste 0.096 0.018 0.079 0.007
(0.061) (0.032) (0.051) (0.011)
 Muslim 0.015* 0.004 0.011* 0.000
(0.008) (0.004) (0.007) (0.001)
 Constant 0.225 0.069 0.155 −0.087**
(0.257) (0.202) (0.188) (0.037)
  1. Bootstrap standard errors shown in parentheses. Significant at *10 %, **5 %, and ***1 %. Note that the first panel of this table does not exactly match that of Table 4. This is because the total number of observations differ across the two tables as industry and occupation information was missing for some individuals