European Sociological Review Advance Access originally published online on June 1, 2005
European Sociological Review 2005 21(3):201-226; doi:10.1093/esr/jci020
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income Attainment During Transformation Processes
A Meta-Analysis of the Market Transition Theory
Wim Jansen, Department of Methodology and Statistics/ICS, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jos Dessens, Department of Methodology and Statistics/ ICS, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Correspondence: Willem-Jan Verhoeven (to whom correspondence should be addressed), Department of Sociology/ICS, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands. Email: w.j.verhoeven{at}fss.uu.nl
The changing communist regime in China and the ‘velvet’ revolutions in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have provided an opportunity to investigate trends in income attainment during processes of transformation. Nee (1989) formulated the market transition theory, which indicates the main determinants of changing income attainment during the transformation process from a state-regulated, centrally planned economy to a market economy. An extensive literature, with studies testing the predictions derived from this theory on China and CEE, has emerged since this seminal article by Nee. However, there are theoretical and empirical inconsistencies in these studies. This calls for a systematic comparison of the empirical results and evaluation of Nee’s theory. This paper reports a meta-analysis performed on 64 publications to determine to what extent there is consistent empirical evidence for the hypothesized relationship between marketization processes and the changing effect of income determinants. We found that political capital remains important during transformation in urban China, the gender gap in income increases in urban China as well as in CEE, and although human capital and market-related resources are important determinants of income, it is not evident that their importance increases during the transformation process. We find some support in favor of the market transition theory, but it needs revision and elaboration.
Manuscript received: October 2004.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  W.-J. Verhoeven, W. Jansen, and J. Dessens Losers in Market Transition: The Unemployed, the Retired, and the Disabled Eur. Sociol. Rev., February 1, 2009; 25(1): 103 - 122. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Wagner and B. Weiss On the Variation of Divorce Risks in Europe: Findings from a Meta-Analysis of European Longitudinal Studies Eur. Sociol. Rev., December 1, 2006; 22(5): 483 - 500. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|