Schooling and economic growth: A King–Rebelo experiment with human capital

Rangazas, Peter

doi:10.1016/s0304-3932(00)00033-7

Cited by 42 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even more plausibly, we shall consider a generalized case comprised between our original specification as given in (1) and the "fully external" case described above. Such case, put forward by Ben-Porath (1967) and strongly supported by Rangazas (2000) and Tamura (2001), has the increments to individual human capital proportional to a CRTS (constant returns to scale) Cobb-Douglas bundle of one's own and society's average human capital. The generalized case imposes more stringent conditions under which long-run balanced growth is possible but does not rule out this option.…”

Section: Externalitiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…a Cobb-Douglas bundle of the two). Voluminous literature in this field includes among others Ben-Porath (1967), Borjas (1992Borjas ( , 1995, Rangazas (2000Rangazas ( , 2005, and Manuelli and Seshadri (2005).…”

Section: Human Capital Accumulation and Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, if θ = 0 then β = λ¯ h − b and thus the growth rate is directly the difference between the unit efficiency of education and the birth rate. However, the case θ = 0 looks empirically implausible (Rangazas, 2000;Tamura, 2001;Manuelli and Seshadri, 2005). Instead, there is evidence that θ is substantially larger, preferably falling in the range (0.75, 0.8): see Borjas (1992;1995) and Rangazas (2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Human Capital, Aggregation, and Growth

Growiec

2010

Macroecon. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The famous Mincer equation regressing log earnings on years of schooling is derived from a linear human capital accumulation equation at the individual level. Even if the cross-sectional Mincer equation holds at the level of individuals, it does not hold at the macro level of countries because aggregation of human capital has to take into account its vintage structure: human capital is embodied in people of different generations whose lifespan is finite. Finiteness of people's lives imposes also a limit on the potential of human capital accumulation to drive aggregate economic growth. Aggregate human capital accumulation may however become an engine of growth thanks to human capital externalities (knowledge spillovers). We use these findings to revisit the assumptions of the well-known Uzawa--Lucas growth model from an aggregation perspective.

show abstract

Section: Externalitiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Human Capital Accumulation and Growthmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human Capital, Aggregation, and Growth

Growiec

2010

Macroecon. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the level of human capital for each family, we know  and thus can use equation (12) to find the distribution of    For ease of comparison, we plot a monotonic transformation of   (  ) against  on the horizontal axis and normalized output along the vertical axis. 16 As before, output is normalized by what it would be with  = 0…”

Section: Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Government education expenditures in early and late childhood

Abington

Blankenau

2013

Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human capital investment in early childhood can lead to large and persistent gains. Beyond this window of opportunity, human capital accumulation is more costly. Despite compelling evidence in support of this notion, government education spending is allocated disproportionately toward late childhood and young adulthood. We consider the consequences of a reallocation using an overlapping generations model with private and public spending on early and late childhood education. Taking as given the higher returns to early childhood investment, we find that the current allocation may nonetheless be appropriate. When we consider a homogeneous population, this can hold for moderate levels of government spending. With heterogeneity, this can hold for middle income workers. Lower income workers, by contrast, may benefit from a reallocation.JEL Classification: E62, I22, H52, J24

show abstract

“…The presence of θ guarantees that parents have the option of not educating their children, because even with e t 0 future human capital remains positive. As in Rangazas (2000), equations (3)-(4) are compatible with endogenous growth for κ 1 τ, and with exogenous growth otherwise. We will later explore the implications of exogenous versus endogenous growth for the long-run behavior of the economy.…”

Section: The Model Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequality and Growth: Why Differential Fertility Matters

Doepke

Croix

2001

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop a new theoretical link between inequality and growth. In our model, fertility and education decisions are interdependent. Poor parents decide to have many children and invest little in education. A mean-preserving spread in the income distribution increases the fertility differential between the rich and the poor, which implies that more weight gets placed on families who provide little education. Consequently, an increase in inequality lowers average education and, therefore, growth. We find that this fertility-differential effect accounts for most of the empirical relationship between inequality and growth.£ We thank

show abstract

Schooling and economic growth: A King–Rebelo experiment with human capital

Cited by 42 publications

References 12 publications

Human Capital, Aggregation, and Growth

Human Capital, Aggregation, and Growth

Government education expenditures in early and late childhood

Inequality and Growth: Why Differential Fertility Matters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About