fathers at a higher social status compared with fathers who were farmers with no education or only primary education. Most importantly and as conjectured, individuals who have experienced high MEPV exposure in early adulthood earn, on average, between 22 percent and 29 percent less than their counterparts who have not had this experience, after controlling for other circumstances and other relevant covariates. This confirms the descriptive patterns described in section 3.

**Table 2: OLS Reg. of individual earnings on observed circumstances and other covariates, dep. var.:** **<u>ln(income)</u>**

||_Reduced_|_-form spec_|_ification_|_Includin_|_g other co_|_variates_|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||_(1)_|_(2)_|_(3)_|_(4)_|_(5)_|_(6)_|
|Father social origin (Ref.: Farmer with No/Prim|||||||
|Edu)|||||||
|Farmers with Sec/Ter Edu|0.133<sup>***</sup>||0.193<sup>***</sup>|0.0224|0.00257|−0.0169|
||(0.0400)||(0.0397)|(0.0369)|(0.0367)|(0.0364)|
|Nonfarm No/Prim Edu|0.417<sup>***</sup>||0.400<sup>***</sup>|0.153<sup>***</sup>|0.0663<sup>**</sup>|0.0201|
||(0.0234)||(0.0233)|(0.0225)|(0.0227)|(0.0223)|
|Nonfarm with Sec/Ter Edu|0.766<sup>***</sup>||0.782<sup>***</sup>|0.405<sup>***</sup>|0.297<sup>***</sup>|0.215<sup>***</sup>|
||(0.0260)||(0.0256)|(0.0260)|(0.0261)|(0.0257)|
|Binary for MEPV intensity (1=high exposure)||−0.284<sup>***</sup>|−0.297<sup>***</sup>|−0.257<sup>***</sup>|−0.240<sup>***</sup>|−0.223<sup>***</sup>|
|||(0.0208)|(0.0203)|(0.0190)|(0.0188)|(0.0184)|
|Male||||0.410<sup>***</sup>|0.439<sup>***</sup>|0.430<sup>***</sup>|
|||||(0.0189)|(0.0188)|(0.0183)|
|Son social origin (Ref.: Farmer with No/Prim Edu)|||||||
|Farmers with Sec/Ter Edu||||0.124<sup>***</sup><br>(0.0279)|0.0898<sup>**</sup><br>(0.0277)|0.116<sup>***</sup><br>(0.0275)|
|Nonfarm No/Prim Edu||||0.273<sup>***</sup>|0.137<sup>***</sup>|0.121<sup>***</sup>|
|||||(0.0298)|(0.0306)|(0.0303)|
|Nonfarm with Sec/Ter Edu||||0.777<sup>***</sup>|0.595<sup>***</sup>|0.536<sup>***</sup>|
|||||(0.0238)|(0.0257)|(0.0256)|
|Urban area|||||0.386<sup>***</sup><br>(0.0213)|0.291<sup>***</sup><br>(0.0212)|
|Constant|10.15<sup>***</sup>|10.55<sup>***</sup>|10.24<sup>***</sup>|9.759<sup>***</sup>|9.688<sup>***</sup>|10.23<sup>***</sup>|
||(0.0137)|(0.0126)|(0.0155)|(0.0193)|(0.0195)|(0.0377)|
|Observations|11609|11609|11609|11609|11609|11609|
|Adj. R<sup>2</sup>|0.078|0.015|0.094|0.226|0.247|0.290|
|Province dummies (Ref.: Kinshasa)|No|No|No|No|No|Yes|

_Note:_ OLS = ordinary least squares. Robust standard errors in parentheses.<sup>*</sup> _p_ < .10<sup>**</sup> _p_ < .05<sup>***</sup> _p_ < .001 The results in table 2, column 3 represent the reduced form estimates (equation 10), whereby only circumstance variables are included. These coefficients capture not only the direct effect of observed circumstances on earnings, controlling for effort (such as the educational attainment of individuals), but also the indirect effect through effort. These estimates are used to calculate the overall share of (observed) opportunities in earnings inequality as defined in equation (12). Using these estimates, the counterfactual distribution specified in equation (11) is simulated.

Table 3 presents the MLD coefficients on the actual observed and counterfactual earnings distribution for the full sample as well for urban and rural areas. It also reports the corresponding estimates of overall inequality of opportunity. At the national level, the overall opportunity share 18