| 000 | 01617cam a2200205 4500500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | 20250121212819.0 | ||
| 041 | _afre | ||
| 042 | _adc | ||
| 100 | 1 | 0 |
_aMaguain, Denis _eauthor |
| 245 | 0 | 0 | _aReturns to Education: An International Comparison |
| 260 | _c2008. | ||
| 500 | _a78 | ||
| 520 | _aWe use two complementary methods to estimate private returns to education. The first (Mincer, 1974) is the earnings-function method, where education and work experience are explanatory variables. The second, called the“full” method, incorporates the costs of human capital investment and computes the discount rate equating the streams of education benefits and costs over individuals'life cycles. Both methods are also used at the aggregate level to estimate social returns to education. Differences in returns depend on (1) each country's economic and social models and (2) the institutional context of education systems (selection and, especially, financing). These methods show that France ranks among the industrialized countries where investment in human capital yields the highest returns, particularly in higher education, in both private and social terms. France shares the lead with the United States and United Kingdom, well ahead of Scandinavian countries. | ||
| 690 | _atuition fee/student loans | ||
| 690 | _aschooling | ||
| 690 | _ainstitutions | ||
| 690 | _areturns | ||
| 786 | 0 | _nEconomie & prévision | o 180-181 | 4 | 2008-08-01 | p. 87-106 | 0249-4744 | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | _uhttps://shs.cairn.info/journal-economie-et-prevision-1-2007-4-page-87?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080 |
| 999 |
_c699300 _d699300 |
||