2023年经济学诺奖得主关于女性薪酬的研究

Finance and economics

财经版块

Golden Goldin

金牌戈尔丁


A Nobel for an economist who has overturned assumptions about gender equality.

一位颠覆了关于性别平等假设的经济学家获得了诺贝尔奖。

On the morning of October 9th the National Bureau of Economic Research circulated a working paper to economists around the world entitled “Why Women Won”.

10月9日上午,美国国家经济研究局向世界各地的经济学家分发了一份题为《女性为何获胜》的工作论文。

In the paper, Claudia Goldin of Harvard University documents how women achieved equal rights in American workplaces and families.

在这篇论文中,哈佛大学的克劳迪娅·戈尔丁记录了女性如何在美国的工作场所和家庭中实现平等权利。

Rather fittingly, a few hours later, Ms Goldin was announced as the winner of this year’s economics Nobel prize, for advancing “our understanding of women’s labour-market outcomes”.

恰合时宜的是,几个小时后,戈尔丁女士赢得了今年的诺贝尔经济学奖,以表彰她“促进了我们对女性劳动力市场的理解”。

Having been the first woman to be granted tenure at Harvard’s economics department, Ms Goldin is now the third woman to have won the subject’s Nobel prize.

戈尔丁是第一位在哈佛大学经济学系获得终身教职的女性,现在她是第三位获得诺贝尔经济学奖的女性。

Taken together, her research provides a comprehensive history of gender labour-market inequality over the past 200 years.

概括而言,她的研究全面展示了过去200年来劳动力市场性别不平等的历史。

In telling this history, she has overturned assumptions about both historical gender relations and what is required to achieve greater equality in the present day.

在讲述这段历史时,她颠覆了关于历史上的性别关系以及在当今实现更广泛的平等所需条件的假设。

Before Ms Goldin’s work, economists had thought that economic growth led to a more level playing field.

在戈尔丁的研究出现之前,经济学家们曾认为,经济增长会带来更公平的竞争环境。

In fact, Ms Goldin showed, the Industrial Revolution drove married women out of the labour force, as production moved from home to factory.

戈尔丁女士指出,事实上,随着生产从家里转移到工厂,工业革命把已婚妇女赶出了劳动力大军。

In research published in 1990 she demonstrated that it was only in the 20th century, when service-sector jobs proliferated and high-school education developed, that the more familiar pattern emerged.

在1990年发表的一项研究中,她证明,直到20世纪,服务业工作激增,高中教育得到发展,才出现了如今人们更熟悉的模式。

The relationship between the size of Western economies and female-labour-force participation is U-shaped—a classic Goldin result.

西方经济体的规模和女性劳动力参与率之间的关系是U型的,这是一个经典的戈尔丁结论。

Ms Goldin’s research has busted other myths, too.

戈尔丁的研究也打破了其他神话。

Lawrence Katz, her colleague and husband, marvels at her ability to trawl archives to fill gaps in the historical data on women’s work.

劳伦斯·卡茨既是戈尔丁的同事,也是她的丈夫,他惊叹于她从档案中搜集资料,并填补女性工作历史数据中的空白的能力。

Simple statistics, such as the female employment rate, were mismeasured because when surveyed, women might respond “I’m a housewife”, notes Ms Goldin, even if they managed the family business.

戈尔丁指出,女性就业率等简单统计数据并不准确,因为在接受调查时,即使女性在管理着家里的生意,她们也可能会回答“我是个家庭主妇”。

Once corrected, the employment rate for white married women, for example, was 12.5% in 1890—five times greater than previously thought.

例如,经过修正后,1890年白人已婚妇女的就业率为12.5%,比之前认为的高出五倍。

Her findings also showed that the gender wage gap narrowed in bursts.

戈尔丁的发现还显示,男女工资差距经历了几次急剧缩小。

Women’s wages rose relative to men’s in 1820-50 and then again in 1890-1930, before shooting up in 1980-2005.

女性的工资在1820-50年间相对于男性有所上升,然后在1890-1930年间再次上升,接着在1980-2005年间猛增。

What drove these bursts?

是什么导致了这些急剧增长?

The initial two came well before the equal-pay movement and were caused by changes in the labour market: first, during the Industrial Revolution; second, during a surge in white-collar employment for occupations like clerical work.

最初的两次出现在同工同酬运动之前,是由劳动力市场的变化造成的:第一次是在工业革命期间,第二次是在文书等白领职业激增期间。

For the third and most substantial drop, in the late 20th century, Ms Goldin emphasises the role of expectations.

第三次也是最大的一次差距缩小发生在20世纪末,戈尔丁强调了心理预期的作用。

If a young woman has more say over when and whether she will have a child, and more confidence that women can work in a wide range of jobs, she may invest more in the future, such as by staying in school for longer.

如果年轻女性在何时以及是否生孩子方面有更多的发言权,并且对女性可以从事各种工作更有信心,那么她可能会更多地对未来投资,比如在学校待更长时间。

In work published in 2002 Ms Goldin and Mr Katz detailed the example of the contraceptive pill, which was approved in 1960, and gave women more control over decisions about children.

在2002年发表的研究中,戈尔丁和卡茨详细阐述了1960年批准避孕药的例子,避孕药赋予女性更多关于生育的控制权。


Between 1967 and 1979 the share of 20- and 21-year-old women who expected to be employed at 35 jumped from 35% to 80%.

1967至1979年间,20至21岁的女性中,预期35岁就业的女性比例从35%跃升至80%。

Expectations also matter for employers.

心理预期对雇主来说也很重要。

Although the pay gap narrowed in the early 1900s, the portion driven by discrimination, rather than job type, grew.

尽管工资差距在20世纪初缩小了,但由歧视而不是工作类型造成的工资差距有所扩大。

An important factor, says Ms Goldin, was changes in how payment was decided.

戈尔丁表示,一个重要因素是什么决定了薪酬多少。

Wages used to be tied to output—how many clothes were knitted, for instance.

过去,工资与产量挂钩,例如织了多少件衣服。

But after industrialisation, workers were increasingly paid periodically, in part because measuring an individual’s output became trickier.

但在工业化之后,工人的工资发放周期日益变长,部分原因是衡量一个人的产出变得更加困难。

Therefore more ambiguous factors grew in importance, such as ideas about how long a worker would stay on the job.

因此,一些更模糊的因素变得越来越重要,比如工人会在岗位上工作多久。

This penalised women, who were expected to quit when they had children.

这对女性十分不利,人们预期女性有了孩子后就会辞职。

Since around 2005 the wage gap has hardly budged.

自2005年左右以来,工资差距几乎没有变化。

Here Ms Goldin’s work questions popular narratives that continue to blame wage discrimination.

对于这个现象,戈尔丁的研究对那些继续将此归咎于工资歧视的流行说法提出了质疑。

Instead, in a book published in 2021, Ms Goldin blames “greedy” jobs, such as being a consultant or lawyer, which offer increasing returns to long (and uncertain) hours.

相反,在2021年出版的一本书中,戈尔丁将此归咎于“贪婪”工作,比如顾问或律师等,这些工作的工作时间越长(且越不稳定),报酬就越高。

She explains how such work interacts with the so-called parenthood penalty.

她解释了这种工作如何与所谓的“亲职惩罚”相互作用。

“Let’s say there are two lawyers, equally brilliant,” explains Ms Goldin.

戈尔丁解释说:“假设有两名律师,他们同样地精明强干。”

Once children arrive, “they realise that they both can’t work these gruelling hours.”

一旦有了孩子,“他们就意识到他们都无法再做这么繁重的工作”。

Women spend more time raising children, which is why the gender pay gap tends to open up after a first child.

女性在养育孩子上花的时间更多,这就是为什么在生了第一个孩子之后,性别收入差距往往会扩大。

Both partners could take on less demanding jobs, but then the couple would earn less as a unit, she explains.

她解释说,夫妻双方都可以从事更轻松的工作,但这样一来,夫妻俩的整体收入就会减少。

Ms Goldin’s research holds lessons for economists and policymakers.

戈尔丁的研究为经济学家和政策制定者提供了借鉴。

For the former group, it shows the importance of history.

对于经济学家来说,这表明了历史的重要性。

Ms Goldin’s prize is the first economics Nobel awarded for work largely in economic history since Robert Fogel, her former adviser, triumphed in 1993.

戈尔丁是自她的导师罗伯特·福格尔于1993年获诺奖以来,第一位主要因经济史方面的工作而获诺贝尔经济学奖的人。

Before Ms Goldin’s research, many academics considered questions about historical gender pay gaps to be unanswerable because of a paucity of data.

在戈尔丁之前,许多学者认为,由于缺乏数据,有关历史性别薪酬差距的问题是无法回答的。

Yet she has repeatedly demonstrated that digging through historical archives allows researchers to credibly answer big questions previously thought beyond their reach.

然而,戈尔丁一再证明,挖掘历史档案可以让研究人员对那些他们以为无法回答的重大问题提供可信的答案。

For policymakers, Ms Goldin’s research demonstrates that fixes for gender inequality vary depending on time and place.

对于政策制定者来说,戈尔丁的研究表明,性别不平等的解决办法因时因地而异。

In early 20th-century America, companies barred married women from obtaining or retaining employment.

在20世纪初的美国,公司禁止已婚女性获得或保留工作。

A policy response came with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned such behaviour.

随着1964年的《民权法案》出台,这种行为被禁止。

Today, wage gaps persist because of greedy jobs and parental norms, rather than because of straightforward employer discrimination.

如今,工资差距之所以持续存在,是因为贪婪的工作和亲职规范,而不是因为直接的雇主歧视。

In the past, Ms Goldin has suggested more flexibility in the workplace could be a solution to the problem.

戈尔丁过去曾表示,更多的工作灵活性可能是解决这个问题的办法。

Perhaps working out how to achieve it will be her next act.

或许,研究如何实现这一目标将是她的下一步行动。

来源:经济学人

参与评论