Please save the date for the next LIS2ER Visiting Seminar, which will feature two presentations.
Where is the digital wage premium priced? Evidence from PIAAC and LIS
Speakers: Byambasuren Dorjnyambuu (Researcher, TARKI Social Research Institute) and Manlaibaatar Zagdbazar (Senior Researcher, Economic Research Institute, Mongolia)
Abstract: Occupation-level exposure indices assume that workers sharing an occupational code perform a common set of tasks. This study examines whether the digital wage premium is priced on occupations or on workers, and assesses what occupation-only income surveys capture relative to surveys that directly observe tasks. Using PIAAC, which measures digital tool use at the individual level, we decompose digital task intensity into an occupational mean and a within-occupation deviation, and estimate the wage return to each. Because residualisation concentrates reporting error in the deviation and attenuates its coefficient by construction, the within-occupation estimate is corrected using a split-half instrumental-variables approach. We then estimate the occupational channel in LIS, where task content is unobserved, and build a bridge between the two data sources that isolates the contributions of wage concept, country composition, occupational resolution, and, on the PIAAC side, direct cognitive-skill measures. We also document the resolution at which occ1_c is populated by country-year, which materially affects what an occupation-merged exposure index can measure.
Income Stratification Predicts the Demand for Redistribution according to the Interests of Groups
Speaker: Yen Kiat Chong (PhD Candidate, National University of Singapore)
Abstract: A key puzzle in political economy research is the absence of a clear relationship between income inequality and the demand for redistribution. Drawing on research showing that individuals often misperceive income inequality and the theory that individuals are perceptive of stratification, I examine the respective effects of income stratification and inequality on individual demand for redistribution, and how their effects are shaped by the group identities of disadvantaged individuals. While multilevel analyses show that both inequality and stratification do not predict the demand for redistribution, disadvantaged group identities (non-college educated, union members, unemployed, non-professional occupational classes and females) shaped these latter relationships in opposite directions. At higher levels of income stratification, the gap between disadvantaged and advantaged individuals widened, with the former having a higher level of support for redistribution. In the case of higher income inequality, the gap between disadvantaged and advantaged individuals narrowed. These findings suggest that income stratification predicts the demand for redistribution according to the economic interests of categorically unequal groups due to its intuitive nature. Conversely, the unintuitive nature of income inequality plausibly explains why higher levels of inequality do not predict the demand for redistribution according to group interest.
.png&w=3840&q=75)
