MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chapter Seven. The Recent Rise Of Urban Wage Inequality

2009· book-chapter· en· W830145470 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ewout Frankema

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmployment, Labor, and Gender Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWage inequalityInequalityWageDemographic economicsEconomicsLabour economicsGeographyEconomic geographyMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter assesses long term changes in the within-factor income distribution, focusing on changes in the distribution of urban formal sector wages. Specifically, it argues that urban formal sector wage inequality has been relatively modest in many Latin American countries (LACs) until, at least, the 1970's. The chapter adopts an international comparative perspective, including the US, Canada and Australia to highlight the specific 'Latin' features of the long run trend in urban wage inequality. It analyses some detailed early 20th century wage distribution surveys in Argentina, showing that urban wage inequality was indeed modest compared to international standards. It also examines the long run trends in the distribution of manufacturing wage income in a Theil-index framework. Finally, the chapter discusses a number of hypotheses to explain the recent rise in urban wage inequality, placing the events of the last quarter of the 20th century in an integrative historical context.Keywords: Latin American countries (LACs); Theil-index framework; urban wage inequality; wage distribution surveys; within-factor income distribution

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmployment, Labor, and Gender StudiesFrench-language works237,207