Judicial Interpretation III of the Marriage Law and Household Income Inequality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/ctpa9x65Keywords:
Judicial Interpretation III of the Marriage Law; Household Income Inequality; Heterogeneity Analysis.Abstract
The promulgation of the 2011 Amendment to the Marriage Law-Judicial Interpretation III-provides the empirical setting for this study. This study treats it as an exogenous shock and examines how household income inequality evolved before and after the amendment. First, household income inequality increased following the promulgation of Judicial Interpretation III of the Marriage Law in 2011, relative to the pre‑reform period. This finding remains robust to alternative inequality measures. Second, heterogeneity analysis indicates that this widening pattern of household income inequality is more pronounced in households where the wife holds property ownership.
Downloads
References
[1] Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2013). The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States. American Economic Review, 103(6), 2121–2168.
[2] Rodrik, D. (2017). Populism and the economics of globalization. National Bureau of Economic Research.
[3] Guriev, S., & Papaioannou, E. (2022). The political economy of populism. Journal of Economic Literature, 60(3), 753–832.
[4] Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of social interactions. Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1063–1093.
[5] Kerr, C., Dunlop, J. T., Harbison, F. H., & Myers, C. A. (1960). Industrialism and industrial man: The problems of labor and management in economic growth. Harvard University Press.
[6] Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. John Wiley & Sons.
[7] Treiman, D. J. (1970). Industrialization and social stratification. Sociological Inquiry, 40(2), 207–234.
[8] Schwartz, C. R. (2013). Trends and variation in assortative mating: Causes and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 451–470.
[9] Greenwood, J., Guner, N., Kocharkov, G., & Santos, C. (2014). Marry your like: Assortative mating and income inequality. American Economic Review, 104(5), 348–353.
[10] Choo, E., & Siow, A. (2006). Who marries whom and why. Journal of Political Economy, 114(1), 175–201.
[11] Sun, Y. (2021). Homogamy internal diversity in China and its impact on family income level. Population Journal, 43(1), 26–36. (In Chinese)
[12] Banerjee, A., Duflo, E., Ghatak, M., & Lafortune, J. (2013). Marry for what? Caste and mate selection in modern India. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 5(2), 33–72.
[13] Chiappori, P. A., Salanié, B., & Weiss, Y. (2017). Partner choice, investment in children, and the marital college premium. American Economic Review, 107(8), 2109–2167.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Scientific Journal of Economics and Management Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
