MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Earning Disparities between Immigrants and Native‐born Canadians*

2000· article· fr· W2074865133 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter S. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2000
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationPolitical scienceHumanitiesSociologyEthnologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La contribution économique des immigrants est mesurée par l'am‐pleur de leurs salaires. Plus on diminue l'écart des salaires, plus les immigrants sont sensés se doter du capital humain. En utilisant les données du recensement de 1996, cet article compare des groupes d'immigrants avec des Canadiens de naissance de même sexe et de même origine raciale à quatre niveaux de la région métropolitaine de recensement, définie par la taille de la population. Les résultats indiquent que les immigrants de même sexe et de même origine raciale gagnent soit le même salaire sinon plus que leurs homologues canadiens. Cependant, en prenant en considération les variations dans le capital humain, l'expérience, les différences dans l'échelle urbaine, la taille de la population immigrante et le taux de chômage, tout groupe d'immigrants gagne moins que son homologue canadien. L'ampleur des salaires nets entre les immigrants et les Canadiens de naissance varie selon le sexe, l'origine raciale et moins ainsi selon le niveau de la région metropolitaine de recensement. Plusieurs fac‐teurs, dont les possibilités d'emploi inégales, touchent le salaire des immigrants. II n'est pas du tout évident de supposer que la teneur du capital humain des immigrants est inférieure alors qu'elle est déduite de la disparité de salaires. The economic contribution of immigrants is often measured by their earnings in that the closer they are to the earnings of native‐born Canadians and the more quickly immigrants can bridge the income gap, the more immigrants are assumed to be endowed with human capital. Using microdata of the 1996 census, this paper compares immigrant groups with native‐born Canadians of the same gender and racial origin at four levels of Census Metropolitan Area defined by population size. The findings indicate that immigrants of the same gender and racial origin earned either the same or more than their native‐born counterparts. However, when variations in human capital, experience, and other individual differences in work‐related characteristics and immigrant experience are taken into account, along with differences in urban scale, immigrant population size and unemployment rate, all immigrant groups earned less than their native‐born counterparts. The magnitude of net earning disparities between immigrants and native‐born Canadians varies, depending on gender, racial origin and less so on CMA level. The study suggests that many factors, including unequal opportunities, affect the earnings of immigrants, and that the assumption of immigrants' inferior human capital content inferred from earning disparities is tenuous at best.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations127
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicMigration, Ethnicity, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207