Publication: Estimating the Returns to Education : Accounting for Heterogeneity in Ability
Loading...
Published
2006-10
ISSN
Date
2012-06-26
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Typically estimates of the benefits of education investments show average private rates of return for the average individual. The average may not be useful for policy. An examination of the distribution of the returns across individuals is needed. The few studies that have examined these patterns focus on high-income countries, showing investments to be more profitable at the top of the income distribution. The implication is that investments may increase inequality. Extending the analysis to 16 East Asian and Latin American countries the authors observe mixed evidence in middle-income countries and decreasing returns in low-income countries. Such differences between countries could be due to more job mobility in industrial countries, scarcity of skills, or differential exposure to market forces.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Ridao-Cano, Cris; Patrinos, Harry Anthony; Sakellariou, Chris. 2006. Estimating the Returns to Education : Accounting for Heterogeneity in Ability. Policy Research Working Paper; No. 4040. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/9026 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Heterogeneous Returns to Education in the Labor Market(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-08)Since the development of human capital theory, countless estimates of the economic benefits of investing in education for the individual have been published. While it is a universal fact that in all countries of the world the more education one has the higher his or her earnings, it is nevertheless important to know the empirical returns to schooling. However, simply knowing average returns is not useful in a world of heterogeneity. This paper finds increasing returns going from the lower to the higher end of the earnings distribution, but with some important differences across regions. The returns increase by quantile for Latin America. The returns decrease by quantile for most East Asian countries, producing an overall equalizing effect. India and Pakistan demonstrate opposite results. In Ghana, the returns across the distribution are flat, while for Kenya and Tanzania education is dis-equalizing.Publication Quality of Schooling, Returns to Schooling and the 1981 Vouchers Reform in Chile(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008-05)This paper exploits unique information on cognitive ability to examine the importance of schooling and non-schooling cognitive skills for heterogeneous individuals using instrumental variables estimation. Using a binary instrument based on the 1981 reform in Chile, the authors find that the main beneficiaries of the reform were those who at the time were pupils in basic schooling (ages 6-13). For this treated group of pupils, only a negligible part of the estimated return to schooling is due to classical ability bias. The labor market reward to an additional year of schooling is a measure of the "true" non-cognitive return to schooling. However, once the treated group is expanded to include secondary school students, the pure return to schooling decreases dramatically, while the return to schooling cognitive and non-schooling cognitive skills increases accordingly, suggesting that a large part of the estimated return in an earnings function is due to classical ability bias. For this treated group (mixture of basic school and secondary school age students), the labor market rewarded cognitive skills (especially those acquired through schooling) significantly.Publication A Note on Schooling and Wage Inequality in the Public and Private Sector(2009)The few studies that have examined the wage impact of education across the earning distribution have focused on high-income countries and show education to be more profitable at the top of the distribution. The implication is that education may increase inequality. Extending the analysis to 16 East Asian and Latin American countries, in Latin America we observe a pattern similar to that of Europe/North America (increasing wage effects), while in East Asia the wage effects are predominantly decreasing by earnings quantile. However, once the analysis is performed separately for the public and the private sector, it is revealed that the strongly decreasing impact of schooling on earnings in the public sectors of East Asian countries is responsible for the overall observed decreasing pattern, while the impact of schooling on earnings in the private sectors of these countries is non-decreasing.Publication Quality of Schooling and Quality of Schools for Indigenous Students in Guatemala, Mexico and Peru(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2006-08)A substantial gap in test scores exists between indigenous and non-indigenous students in Latin America. Using test score data for 3rd and 4th year primary school pupils in Guatemala and Peru, and 5th grade pupils in Mexico, the authors assess the magnitude of the indigenous and non-indigenous test score gap and identify the main family and school inputs contributing to the gap. A decomposition of the gap into its constituent components suggests that the proportion that is explained by family and school characteristics is between 41 and 75 percent of the overall test-score gap. Furthermore, family variables contribute more than school variables to the overall explained component.Publication Functional Literacy, Heterogeneity and the Returns to Schooling : Multi-Country Evidence(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-11)Little is known about which of the skills that make up workers' human capital contribute to higher earnings. Past empirical evidence suggest that most of the return to schooling is generated by effects or correlates unrelated to the skills measured by the available tests. This paper uses the International Adult Literacy and the Adult Literacy and Life Skills surveys to obtain multi-country estimates of the components of the return to schooling. The results reveal considerable heterogeneity and a dichotomy between two groups of countries. For a subgroup of educationally advanced countries, nearly half of the return to schooling can be attributed to labor marker-relevant functional literacy skills associated with schooling, while for a subgroup of less educationally advanced countries, such skills account for just over 20 percent of the return to schooling, while the return to schooling mostly reflects the signaling value of schooling.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.