Human Capital and Rates of Return: Brilliant Ideas or Ideological Dead Ends?

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 644-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven J. Klees
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Rates Of Return

scholarly journals DETERMINANT RETURN TO EDUCATION IN INDONESIA

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mukhamad Azhar ◽  
S. Suwatno ◽  
Amir Mahmud
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Human Resources ◽  
School Enrollment ◽  
Return To Education ◽  
Learning Session ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Returns To Schooling ◽  
Return To Schooling ◽  
Less Developed Country

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2016). Penduduk Berumur 15 Tahun ke Atas yang Bekerja Selama Seminggu yang Lalu Menurut Lapangan Pekerjaan Utama dan Pendidikan Tertinggi yang Ditamatkan. Jakarta: Badan Pusat Statistik.Badan Pusat Statistik.(2016). Keadan Angkatan Kerja Provinsi Banten Agustus 2016. BPS Banten.Becker, Gary S. (1975). Human Capital, A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, 2nd Edition. Diakses dari http://www.nber.org/Deolalikar, Anil. (1993). Gender Differences in the Returns to Schooling and in School Enrollment Rates in Indonesia. Journal of Human Resources. 28 (4), 899-932[Friedman, Howard S., Schustack, Miriam W. (2008). Kepzribadian Teori Klasik dan Riset Modern. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.Heckman, James J., Lochner, Lance J., dan Todd, Petra E. (2003) Fifty Years of Mincer Earnings aKrueger, Alan B., and Lindahl, Mikael. (2000). Education for Growth: Why and For Whom?. Working Paper No. 7591.Megasari,  Diah Nurulia, (2014). Analisis Tingkat Pengembalian Investasi Pendidikan Antara Laki-Laki Dan Perempuan Di Provinsi Jawa Barat Tahun 2014. Universitas Negeri YogyakartaOECD Stat. Extract. Dzaiakses dari: http://stats.oecd.org, pada 1 April 2015.OECD. (2000). Estimating Economic and Social Returns to Learning: Session 3 Issues for Discussion.Perkins, D.H, Radelet, S, Snograss, R.R, Gillis, M, and Roemer, M. 2001. Economics of Development.WW. Norton & Company, Inc. United States of America.Psacharopoulos, G. 1985. “Returns to education: A further international update andimplication”. The Journal of Human Resources, 20 (4), 583-597.Psacharopoulos, George 1994 “Returns to Investment in Education: A Global Update”.World development vol. 22 no. 9 pp 1325-43.Psacharopoulos, George. (1993). Return to Investment in Education: A Global    Update.               Diaksesdari:             http://www- wds.worldbank.org/servlet, pada 10 Agustus 2015.Psacharopoulos, George. (2006). The Value of Investment in Education: Theory, Evidence, and Policy. Journal of Education Finance. 32(2), 113-136.Purnastuti, L., dkk. (2011). Economic Return to Schooling in a Less Developed Country: Evidence for Indonesia. Diakses dari: http://kastoria.teikoz.gr/icoae2/, pada 20 Desember 2014.Purnastuti, L., dkk. (2015). Analisis Tingkat Pengembalian Investasi Pendidikan di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Prosiding Seminar Nasional 9 Mei 2015. Hlm. 797-806Purnastuti, L., Miller, P., dan Salim, R. (2013). Decilining Rates of Return to evidence for Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesia Economic Studies.49(2), 213-236.Purnastuti, Losina., Miller, Paul., and Salim, Ruhul (2012). Economic Returns to Schooling in A Less Developed Country: Evidence for Indonesia. Journal of European Economy. Vol. 11. Sepecial Issue.Purnastuti, Losina., Miller, Paul., and Salim, Ruhul (2013). Declining rates of return to education: evidence for Indonesia, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies.Schultz, Theodore, W (1961). Investment in Human Capital. Diakses dari: www.ssc.wisc.edu, pada 23 Februari 2015.

Occupational Differences in the Return on Human Capital in the Spanish Travel Agency and Hospitality Industries

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 1325-1345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro García Pozo ◽  
Andrés J. Marchante Mera ◽  
José Luis Sánchez Ollero
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Relative Weight ◽  
Travel Agency ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
Occupational Differences ◽  
Rate Of Returns

This study analyses the returns on human capital in the Spanish hospitality and travel agency industries across seven occupational categories by gender. It is motivated by evidence that there is great variation between jobs in this sector and that estimations of the rate of returns for each component of human capital for the entire sector may not be accurate. The main results indicate that the rates of return on human capital are lower in these industries for most occupations than in the private services sector. Given that differences in the returns on human capital components across occupational categories are statistically significant and large, then the relative weight of each segment within the aggregate may explain the results obtained in previous studies.

scholarly journals Human Capital and the Wealth of Nations

2014 ◽  
Vol 104 (9) ◽  
pp. 2736-2762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo E. Manuelli ◽  
Ananth Seshadri
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Capital Theory ◽  
Country Differences ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
Wealth Of Nations

We reevaluate the role of human capital in determining the wealth of nations. We use standard human capital theory to estimate stocks of human capital and allow the quality of human capital to vary across countries. Our model can explain differences in schooling and earnings profiles and, consequently, estimates of Mincerian rates of return across countries. We find that effective human capital per worker varies substantially across countries. Cross-country differences in Total Factor Productivity (TFP) are significantly smaller than found in previous studies. Our model implies that output per worker is highly responsive to changes in TFP and demographic variables. (JEL E23, I25, J24, J31, O47)

The Social Structure of Competition

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Burt
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Human Capital ◽  
Social Structure ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
Rate Of Return ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Job Experience ◽  
The Social ◽  
Lines Of Credit ◽  
Market Production

A player brings capital to the competitive arena and walks away with profit determined by the rate of return where the capital was invested. The market production equation predicts profit: invested capital, multiplied by the going rate of return, equals the profit to be expected from the investment. You invest a million dollars. The going rate of return is 10 percent. The profit is one hundred thousand dollars. Investments create an ability to produce a competitive product. For example, capital is invested to build and operate a factory. Rate of return is an opportunity to profit from the investment. The rate of return is keyed to the social structure of the competitive arena and is the focus here. Each player has a network of contacts in the arena. Something about the structure of the player’s network and the location of the player’s contacts in the social structure of the arena provides a competitive advantage in getting higher rates of return on investment. This chapter is about that advantage. It is a description of the way in which social structure renders competition imperfect by creating entrepreneurial opportunities for certain players and not for others. A player brings at least three kinds of capital to the competitive arena. Other distinctions can be made, but three are sufficient here. First, the player has financial capital: cash in hand, reserves in the bank, investments coming due, lines of credit. Second, the player has human capital. Your natural qualities—charm, health, intelligence, and looks—combined with the skills you have acquired in formal education and job experience give you abilities to excel at certain tasks. Third, the player has social capital: relationships with other players. You have friends, colleagues, and more general contacts through whom you receive opportunities to use your financial and human capital. I refer to opportunities in a broad sense, but I certainly mean to include the obvious examples of job promotions, participation in significant projects, influential access to important decisions, and so on. The social capital of people aggregates into the social capital of organizations.

scholarly journals Rates of Return on Physical and Human Capital in Africa's Manufacturing Sector

2000 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-827 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arne Bigsten ◽  
Anders Isaksson ◽  
Måns Söderbom ◽  
Paul Collier ◽  
Albert Zeufack ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Manufacturing Sector ◽  
Rates Of Return

scholarly journals A Theoretical Framework for Estimating the Rate of Return to a Pharmacy Education Anywhere

Pharmacy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 162
Author(s):  
Manuel J. Carvajal ◽  
Ioana Popovici
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Pharmacy Education ◽  
Rate Of Return ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Education Investment ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Benefits And Costs

Undertaking a pharmacy education is an investment in human capital. Candidates trade off present versus future costs and benefits. They make this investment with the expectation of earning enough income throughout their worklives to make their undertaking financially worthwhile. Whether or not this occurs is determined by the rate of return. The aim of the current study was to construct a theoretical model to estimate the rate of return to a pharmacy education investment. Specifications for model assumptions, inputs, and outputs are discussed. The outputs are the rates of return, the inputs are the costs and benefits of a pharmacy education, and the assumptions illustrate the circumstances of the individual or group for whom the model is built. The rate of return is the annual percentage that equates the streams of benefits and costs over the investment span. The higher the value of the rate of return to a pharmacy education is, the more profitable is the investment. This theoretical model may be used to estimate the financial viability of pharmacy and compare it to the viability of other professions or to the viability of pharmacy among various locations.

Gender wage differentials and discrimination among Israeli managers

1998 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoshana Neuman ◽  
Jacob Weisberg
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Statistical Method ◽  
Wage Differentials ◽  
Wage Discrimination ◽  
Comparable Worth ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Wage Difference ◽  
Gender Wage Differentials

The purpose of this paper is to investigate wage differentials and wage discrimination among 9,035 male and female Israeli managers. In our sample, female managers earn on average 64 per cent of their male counterparts. Using a statistical method originally developed by Ronald Oaxaca, we found that out of 36 per cent wage difference, 7.2 per cent were “legitimate”, stemming from differences in human capital characteristics, while 28.8 per cent were “illegitimate”, due to wage discrimination, in the form of different rates of return to the various characteristics. As wage differentials stem mainly from discrimination, affirmative action and comparable worth can serve as a partial remedy.

Winners and Losers

2020 ◽  
pp. 67-88
Author(s):  
Phillip Brown
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Knowledge Workers ◽  
Rates Of Return ◽  
The Real ◽  
Orthodox Theory ◽  
Important Form

This chapter asks who wins and who loses in the distribution of credentials, jobs, and wages. Orthodox theorists argue that human capital is the most important form of capital in modern economies, so by investing in education individuals can earn the returns on their rising productivity. This led to the view that knowledge workers would be the key beneficiaries of today’s economy, as they would supersede traditional capitalists as wealth creators. This chapter presents evidence of who have been the real winners and losers in Becker’s “age of human capital.” It shows how rates of return reflect social inequalities in class, gender, and ethnicity. This analysis challenges three key tenets of orthodox theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document