Patterns of Overeducation in Europe: The Role of Field of Study

Abstract

This study investigates the incidence of overeducation among graduate workers in 21 European Union countries and its underlying factors based on the European Labor Force Survey 2016. Although controlling for a wide range of covariates, the particular interest lies in the role of fields of study for vertical educational mismatch. The study reveals country differences in the impact of these factors. Compared to Social sciences, male graduates from, for example, Education, Health and welfare, Engineering, and ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) are less and those from Services and Natural sciences are more at risk in a clear majority of countries. These findings are robust against changes of the standard education. Moreover, some fields show gender-specific risks. We suggest that occupational closure, productivity signals and gender stereotypes answer for these cross-field and cross-country differentials. Moreover, country fixed effects point to relevant structural differences between national labor markets and between educational systems.

Same Degree, Same Opportunities? Educational and Social Background Effects on Overeducation in Germany

“…Previous overeducation research considering educational fields focused on higher education, whereas differences across levels of education (vocational and academic) have not been analyzed so far. For the case of academic education, single-country and multiplecountry studies have confirmed cross-field differences in the overeducation risks of graduates in Germany (Berlingieri and Erdsiek 2012;Berlingieri and Zierahn 2014;Ortiz and Kucel 2008;Rossen et al 2019). The empirical evidence supports the importance of higher education differentiation in the form of field of study for understanding overeducation risks (Barone and Ortiz 2011;Ortiz and Kucel 2008).…”

“…Occupation-specific fields should more likely lead to a homogeneous assessment of skills and abilities relevant for the occupation than less specific, more general fields of education. More occupationally specific fields of education seem to represent entry requirements for the corresponding occupations that are generally acknowledged by employers (Rossen et al 2019). Employers may thereby more easily make assumptions about skills relevant for the job, without relying on additional information on personal and non-cognitive characteristics (Capsada-Munsech 2015).…”

“…Previous overeducation studies have focused on more highly educated workers, and an assessment of differences across educational levels (vocational and academic) is lacking. For the case of academic education, evidence for Germany has revealed that overeducation risks differ across fields (Berlingieri and Erdsiek 2012;Berlingieri and Zierahn 2014;Ortiz and Kucel 2008;Rossen et al 2019). Accordingly, research has highlighted the relevance of differentiating higher education by fields for a more comprehensive understanding of overeducation risks (Barone and Ortiz 2011;Capsada-Munsech 2015;Ortiz and Kucel 2008;Rossen et al 2019).…”

“…For the case of academic education, evidence for Germany has revealed that overeducation risks differ across fields (Berlingieri and Erdsiek 2012;Berlingieri and Zierahn 2014;Ortiz and Kucel 2008;Rossen et al 2019). Accordingly, research has highlighted the relevance of differentiating higher education by fields for a more comprehensive understanding of overeducation risks (Barone and Ortiz 2011;Capsada-Munsech 2015;Ortiz and Kucel 2008;Rossen et al 2019). The emerging qualitative distinctions at the same level of education driven by educational expansion processes pushes the horizontal differentiation represented by fields (Reimer et al 2008).…”

The Scale of Overeducation in the Rural Labor Market

“…В статье F. Green и S. McIntosh с использованием данных по Великобритании наиболее высокие показатели недоиспользования образования выявлены для лиц с дипломами в сфере управления, бизнеса и социальных наук, наиболее низкие -в сфере информационных технологий и естественных наук [23]. В статье A. Rossen и соавторов, анализирующих данные по 21 стране Евросоюза, более высокие показатели недоиспользования образования получены для специалистов с дипломами в сфере услуг и в области естественных наук, более низкие -для инженеров, специалистов в области педагогики, медицины, информационных технологий [24]. В статье J. Robst наиболее высокие показатели недоиспользования в США отмечены для работников с дипломами в сфере социальных наук, филологии и многопрофильных программ (Liberal Arts); наиболее низкие -у работников с дипломами в сфере информационных технологий, медицины и библиотечного дела [25].…”