**<u>Table 4: Contribution of individual circumstance variables to earnings inequality: MLD (and Ratio)</u>**

||<br>_Total_<br>_observed_||<br>_Equalizing fath_<br>_social origin_|<br>_er_<br>|<br>_Equa_<br>|<br>_lizing MEPV e_<br>_in early adulth_|<br>_xposure_<br>_ood_|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||_inequality_<br>_(MLD,_<br>_factual)_|_MLD_<br>_estimate_<br>_(CFD)_|_Inequality of_<br>_opportunity_<br>_level_|_Share in_<br>_Total_<br>_observed_<br>_inequality_|_MLD_<br>_estimate_<br>_(CFD)_|_Inequality_<br>_of_<br>_opportunity_<br>_level_|_Share in_<br>_Total_<br>_observed_<br>_inequality_|
||_(1)_|_(2)_|_(3)_|_(4)_|_(5)_|_(6)_|_(7)_|
|Full sample<br>All|<br>0.635<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.550<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.0850<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.134<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.619<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.0159<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.0251<sup>***</sup>|
|Male|(0.014)<br>0.618<sup>***</sup>|(0.013)<br>0.530<sup>***</sup>|(0.006)<br>0.0880<sup>***</sup>|(0.008)<br>0.142<sup>***</sup>|(0.013)<br>0.600<sup>***</sup>|(0.003)<br>0.0178<sup>***</sup>|(0.004)<br>0.0287<sup>***</sup>|
|Female|(0.019)<br>0.567<sup>***</sup>|(0.015)<br>0.492<sup>***</sup>|(0.008)<br>0.0747<sup>***</sup>|(0.011)<br>0.132<sup>***</sup>|(0.017)<br>0.562<sup>***</sup>|(0.003)<br>0.00476|(0.005)<br>0.00839|
||(0.022)|(0.017)|(0.009)|(0.012)|(0.024)|(0.006)|(0.007)|
|Urban sample<br>All|0.618<sup>***</sup>|0.579<sup>***</sup>|0.0385<sup>***</sup>|0.0624<sup>***</sup>|0.599<sup>***</sup>|0.0191<sup>***</sup>|0.0310<sup>***</sup>|
|Male|(0.016)<br>0.556<sup>***</sup>|(0.018)<br>0.521<sup>***</sup>|(0.007)<br>0.0352<sup>***</sup>|(0.011)<br>0.0633<sup>***</sup>|(0.016)<br>0.537<sup>***</sup>|(0.004)<br>0.0193<sup>***</sup>|(0.007)<br>0.0347<sup>***</sup>|
|Female|(0.021)<br>0.581<sup>***</sup>|(0.022)<br>0.544<sup>***</sup>|(0.009)<br>0.0378<sup>***</sup>|(0.016)<br>0.0650<sup>***</sup>|(0.019)<br>0.576<sup>***</sup>|(0.004)<br>0.00520|(0.006)<br>0.00894|
||(0.029)|(0.027)|(0.009)|(0.015)|(0.032)|(0.008)|(0.014)|
|Rural sample<br>All|<br>0.393<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.390<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.00321<sup>**</sup>|<br>0.00816<sup>**</sup>|<br>0.390<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.00313<sup>**</sup>|<br>0.00796<sup>**</sup>|
||(0.009)|(0.010)|(0.001)|(0.003)|(0.009)|(0.001)|(0.003)|
|Male|<br>0.386<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.383<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.00354<sup>**</sup>|<br>0.00917<sup>**</sup>|<br>0.383<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.00322<sup>*</sup>|<br>0.00833<sup>**</sup>|
||(0.011)|(0.012)|(0.001)|(0.004)|(0.011)|(0.002)|(0.004)|
|Female|<br>0.333<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.332<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.00123|<br>0.00371|<br>0.332<sup>***</sup>|<br>0.000511|<br>0.00153|
||(0.012)|(0.012)|(0.001)|(0.004)|(0.012)|(0.002)|(0.006)|

_Note:_ MLD = mean log deviation. CFD = counterfactual distribution. Bootstrapped standard errors in parentheses based on 99 replications;<sup>*</sup> _p_ < .10<sup>**</sup> _p_ < .05<sup>***</sup> _p_ < .001 The analysis of the effect of each individual circumstance starts with the individual’s social background. The sample estimates show that the social background of the individual’s father is associated with the largest share of inequality in earnings. Overall, the share of earnings inequality accounted for by the social background of the individual’s father is between 13 percent and 14 percent across gender; the overall average is 13.4 percent. In the urban sample, the social status of the father is associated with 6 percent to 7 percent of total earnings inequality. However, in rural areas, the social background of the individual’s father is associated with less than 1 percent of earnings inequality (table 4, column 4). On parental social background, the results are in line with earlier studies. For instance, using household income as outcome, Ferreira and Gignoux (2008, 2011) document that the mother’s educational attainment is associated with 9 percent to 12 percent of total inequality in six Latin American countries (Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama, and Peru). In the case of urban India, Singh (2012) finds that the father’s educational attainment is associated with 11 percent to 18 percent of total labor earnings inequality across the cohort. In the Egyptian context, Hassine (2012) documents that the relative shares of earnings 20