Inequality in the labor market: lower perceived returns among marginalized youths and girls

Purpose This paper examines perceived labor market earnings among adolescents and their parents by gender and caste. Previous research has established that lower subjective expectations of labor market returns among parents affect educational investment. Likewise, subjective expectations of adolescents about labor market returns are likely to affect their commitment to their education. In the labor market, gender and caste biases manifest itself in terms of lower wages for women and persons from marginalized communities. The authors ask if perceived earnings among adolescents and their parents vary by caste and gender over and above their intrinsic ability. Design/methodology/approach The authors use a unique dataset on adolescents that has been recently collected (2013-2015) by ASER Centre, the research and assessment wing of Pratham Education Foundation for the analysis. To answer the research question posed in the paper, they use standard OLS and quantile regression techniques. Findings Results confirm that girls have lower expected earnings than boys. Caste differences appear more rigid in Bihar. Research limitations/implications The authors recognize that the results presented do not take into consideration the issue of selection bias. Hence, they are applicable not to the average adolescents in the study districts, but only to those who reported expected earnings. That said, they do not think that this technical limitation dilutes the broad policy conclusions emerging from the study. Originality/value The paper uses cognition as a measure of an adolescent’s intrinsic ability. Therein lays the uniqueness of the paper. It brings into the discussion on expected earnings test scores as a measure of an adolescent’s cognitive ability. It is also unique in that it focuses on adolescents in the age group of 11-16 years who are likely to join the labor force in few years. Previous discussion of subjective expectations in India did not include any measure to capture cognitive ability and did not focus exclusively on adolescents.