Essay I: Return to Education for the Deaf/Hearing Impaired and the Blind/Visually Impaired, 1991-2000

   Mincer-equations are estimated for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired. The results show that the estimates of the coefficient for the education variable are lower than for a comparison group, and that for several years it is not statistically significant that education for the blind/visually impaired has a positive effect on labour income.

Essay II: Labour Income Distribution for the Deaf/Hearing Impaired and the Blind/Visually Impaired in Sweden, 1991-2000

   Incomes or the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired are studied. They are compared with the income distribution for a comparison group. The results show that the income distribution is most unequal for the blind/visually impaired and that the average and median incomes are clearly lowest for this group. One explanation is a high share of zero earners.

Essay III: Wages and Wage Distributions for the Deaf/Hearing Impaired and the Blind/Visually Impaired with and without Wage Subsidy

   Mincer-equations with a wage subsidy dummy are estimated and wage distributions are studied for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired. The coefficient for the wage subsidy dummy is discussed. From the wage distributions for full-time employed people we see that employed people with a wage subsidy have a more compact wage distribution compared to employed people without a wage subsidy.

Essay IV: Employment for the Deaf/Hearing Impaired and the Blind/Visually Impaired during the 1990s

   Employment rates for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired are compared with a group that represents the Swedish population. The results show that the pattern and level of the employment rate are similar for the deaf/hearing impaired and the comparison group. The employment rate is clearly lower for the blind/visually impaired people, however.

Employment rates for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired are compared with a group that represents the Swedish population. The results show that the pattern and the level of the employment rate are similar for the deaf/hearing impaired and the comparison group. The employment rate is clearly lower for the blind/visually impaired, however.

Incomes of the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired are studied. They are compared with the income distribution for a comparison group. The results show that the income distribution is most unequal for the blind/visually impaired and that the average and median incomes are clearly lowest for this group. One explanation is a high share of zero earners.

Mincer-equations are estimated for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired. The results show that the estimates of the coefficient for the education variable are lower than for a comparison group, and that for several years it is not statistically significant that education for the blind/visually impaired has a positive effect on labour income.

Mincer-equations with a wage subsidy dummy are estimated and wage distributions are studied for the deaf/hearing impaired and the blind/visually impaired. The coefficient for the wage subsidy dummy is discussed. From the wage distributions for full-time employed people we see that employed people with a wage subsidy have a more compact wage distribution compared to employed people without a wage subsidy.