Exclusion and Discrimination as Sources of Inter-Ethnic Inequality in Peru
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2008
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Fondo Editorial
Abstract
De acuerdo a la Enaho 2003, el ingreso promedio de un trabajador indígena es solo 56% del de un trabajador no-indígena. Sin embargo, estudios sobre discriminación étnica en los mercados laborales de Perú usualmente hallan brechas demasiado pequeñas como para explicar la desigualdad observada. De acuerdo a Figueroa (2003), la exclusión social es una fuente importante de desigualdad interétnica, pero esto no ha sido contrastado empíricamente. El objetivo central de este documento es llenar esa brecha estimando qué porcentaje de la desigualdad se debe a exclusión y qué porcentaje a discriminación, comparando directamente los efectos. La metodología econométrica utilizada (hurdle models) permite incluir en el análisis a los trabajadores con ingresos nulos y contrarrestar problemas de endogeneidad econométrica. Los resultados implican que la exclusión juega un papel más importante que la discriminación. Sin exclusión, el Gini de ingresos laborales se reduciría de 0.64 a cerca de 0.45; sin discriminación, a alrededor de 0.50.
According to the 2003 National Household Survey, mean labour income for an indigenous worker is only 56% of that for a non-indigenous worker. Studies of ethnic discrimination in Peru’s labour markets generally find that discrimination is too low to explain inequalities of this magnitude. However, Sigma Theory (Figueroa 2003) predicts that social exclusion is a source of inter-ethnic inequality, and that has not been empirically tested. The primary aim of this paper is to fill this gap by estimating the extent to which exclusion and discrimination contribute to income inequality. Hurdle models are used to tackle down econometric endogeneity of years of schooling and truncation-at-zero of incomes. The results imply that exclusion plays a stronger role on inequality than discrimination: without exclusion, the Gini of labour income would decrease from 0.64 to 0.45, and without discrimination it would be reduced to 0.50.
According to the 2003 National Household Survey, mean labour income for an indigenous worker is only 56% of that for a non-indigenous worker. Studies of ethnic discrimination in Peru’s labour markets generally find that discrimination is too low to explain inequalities of this magnitude. However, Sigma Theory (Figueroa 2003) predicts that social exclusion is a source of inter-ethnic inequality, and that has not been empirically tested. The primary aim of this paper is to fill this gap by estimating the extent to which exclusion and discrimination contribute to income inequality. Hurdle models are used to tackle down econometric endogeneity of years of schooling and truncation-at-zero of incomes. The results imply that exclusion plays a stronger role on inequality than discrimination: without exclusion, the Gini of labour income would decrease from 0.64 to 0.45, and without discrimination it would be reduced to 0.50.
Description
Keywords
Economy, Competition, Natural Gas, Argentina., Economía, Desigualdad Interétnica, Exclusión, Hurdle Models
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess