 This is really my pleasure to give the talk here. So, yeah, also my honor to be a half of these authors, to give the talk. So the income inequality in China is part of the wider, bigger project on the inequality in developing giants. So we just follow the general, you say, the guideline of the wider project by focusing on four important issues. The first issue is that the long-term, the change in the income inequality in the past four decades. The second issue is about long-term, the trend of wage inequality in urban China, also in past four decades. The third one is that the topic, the top incomes, and its impact on the income equality over time. So last topic is about redistributive policy and its impact on income equality in general, also on the income gap between urban and rural. So follow these four topics, that is, that we have finished my team and my colleagues and I have finished the five four papers. The four papers focus on the different topics, then we have summary papers, which summarize the findings and try to give some explanations on the dynamic change in the income equality over time. So first the paper is about the long-term evaluation of the income equality and poverty in China. It's written by three authors, my colleague, Chu Liang, a law professor in the BNU, also Terry Sikler, she's here, and myself. This, you see, paper mainly focuses on income equality. And the second paper is about the wage growth and wage inequality in urban China between 1988 and 2013. It covered almost 25 years. So the two authors, Bjorn Gustafsson is here, also Haeyuan is also here. So the third paper, you see, is on the redistributive role of the government transfer on the income equality in China, written by Dr. Meng Cai and Professor Xi Ming from Renmin University, China. So this paper focus on trying to locate impact of this public transfer on the income equality whether you reduce the income equality and increase the income equality. Also, you investigate the detailed items of each public transfer on the income equality. The fourth paper is on the top incomes in China. You see, data collection and impact on the income equality, written by my colleague, Qinghai Li from Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, also here by my colleague, Haeyuan Wang from Peking University and myself. So Terry S. Sikulon and I wrote the draft of the summary paper. So then, you see, my following presentation is divided into two parts. The first part just summarized the key findings from these four papers. The second part gave some explanations why income equality increase, why income equality become stable recently, something like that. So first, the finding is that income equality was rising before 2007, and then falling slightly by using official data or household data, you see. If you look at Genie Call Efficient by using the data from the survey, it's a cheap survey. The cheap survey has been conducted by my research teams. We have the survey in 1988 in 1995 and 2002 and 2007 and 2013. So the Genie Call Efficient of the income equality increased from 1988 to 2007. And then decreased by almost 6% point to the 2013. So if you look at official data, we'll show the same path. Incoming quality increased till the 2008, something like that. That decreased slightly. That finding is based on the household data, actually. The second finding is that rising income equality was due to the high income percentiles have fast income growth, that low percentile. And the falling income equality was due to faster income growth of the low income percentiles. That means in the past third decade, low income growth and high income growth, they all have the income growth. But you see, in the different period, low income growth have lower income growth than high income growth. And in the last 10 years, the low income growth have high income growth, then you see high income growth. So also the third finding is that when of major driving forces for rising income equality before 2007, this is changed in the household income structure. That means the share of farming income you see having equalizing effect but have declined constantly. And the rising income, the more unequally distributed in rural area have increased over time. And the property income was nothing in the 80s, in the 90s. But have increasingly unequally grown since the 2000s. So transfer income and also wedged income have become more equally distributed and contributing to the decline income equality recently. So the fourth, the finding is that urban and rural income gap was rising till the 2007. And then following significantly, resulting in decline income equality nationally. If you look at, you see, income gap, income, urban rural income ratios, it increased over time till the 2007, it's become the largest gap that declined in the 2013 indeed. Also, if you do some decomposition of the total overall income equality with the same urban and rural area and between rural and urban area, you will find the share of the same income equality is a decline till the 2007 and the increase. That means between urban and rural inequality increased till 2007 and decreased. So that means urban and rural income gap become very big driver forces for the change in the overall income inequality. Fifth finding is that the wedged income inequality in rural area was rising before 2007, almost the same pattern as change in the income inequality. And then becomes stable. If you look at genie coefficient of wedge inequality or the tariff index, you will find, you see, a inequality increase till the 2007, that becomes quite stable indeed. So the sixth finding is that the changes in wedge sending mechanisms, such as gender wedge gap, was smaller in the 80s and then widening till the 2007. But in the 2013, no less 36% of female works were classified as lower wedged earners to be compared to the 22% of male works. The role of seniority become a decline before 2007, then have increased significantly recently. So returns to education was very low in the 1980s and increased in the 90s and early 2000s and have slightly decreased after 2007. So work seeing the SOE and the foreign investment enterprise have received wedged premium compared to other works in rural area. So the seventh key findings is that parking transfer have a positive role under reducing income inequality in China, just before the income, before the transfer, that is. So that means, yeah, if you have the transfer income, you will have the genie like this. If you take the transfer income out, you will get a little bit high income inequality. So income inequality increased, decreased by the transfer income indeed. Also, if you look at the share of the transfer income for the different desires, you will see not a very big difference in shares for the different desires. So that means if you look at the impact of transfer income on the income inequality after transfer income, after the transfer income, you will see if the transfer income have some disequalized effect on the income inequality. That means after transfer income, if you increase the transfer then you will have high income inequality. You see, that is very, very interesting result. So the last finding is that the first growth number of China is a million years in the last decade. You see the data on the top incomes indicated that top income have extremely high income and wealth and they are excluding from or under representative in the household service. This leads to considerable and estimate income equality in the China. That means if you include the top data of the top income, you see, and combine with household data, you will get quite high the genie of the income inequality. So try to give some explanations. So the first thing is that kind of the long-term trend of the income inequality in China can be explained by pushing its hypothesis. If you know that, no. You see, Andrew, yeah, does not agree with that. So that means, yeah, if you just look at the actual change in the actual genie of the income inequality over time, also you can get the line predicted by pushing its hypothesis. You will find. So the actually genie, the change, not consistent with what are predicted by pushing its hypothesis. So that means there will be lower income equality at the beginning of the economic reform. Also, even when the income come to the top level, you see there will tend to be decline. But actually income equality continue rising over time. That means pushing its hypothesis cannot predict what happened in the income equality in China sometime. So our explanation is that we try to use a low-cut income inequality from the perspective of economic development and the economic transitions also changing in the public policies. So when explanation is that the rising income equality in the first three decades of the economic reform was partly due to change in economic structure. That means economic development, faster economic growth, also reallocation of labor from agriculture to the industrial to the service sectors, also urbanization and migration, something like that. So that is also rising income equality was due to transition from the planning economy to the market economy and the economic decentralization and the development of the private sector and the privatization of SOE and the integration into the world economy. Faker just gave you an impression that the export and import, the growth, you say after 2000, then we in China and into WTO have very fast growth indeed. So fast growth in export and the import that will observe services labor from rural areas. So another explanation is that you say rising income equality have also resulting from incomplete economic and political reforms, incomplete. You know that China is still on the transition. So that means that is incomplete transitions leading to corruption, red thinking and the monopoly of SOE and the rapid rise of a total income. You say this figure indicates the number of million years the growth in the last 15 years. You will find is after 2013 a big jump in number of million years. Even you say the threshold for million years increased. This is a big number increase. So also we should realize some way equalizing fact which try to reduce income inequalities like reduction and the vanishing of the surplus labor in rural sectors. Can you explain the rising wage of the rural urban migrants resulting falling income gap between urban and rural households? That is the number of rural markets work in the urban areas. That's more than nearly 200 million of the migrants work work in the urban area. That means that is the wage increase of the migrants work is after 2003. So that means migrant workers make more money. They will send back to their hometowns. That means that it reduces income gap between urban and rural areas. Another explanation for another equalized fact is that the redistributive of the policy have had a relatively weak impact on the reducing income inequality. But it's become stronger in the last decade, which can be partly why income inequality have a stable tendency recently. So that's your thank you.