HRM留学作业:人力资本增长理论的数据问题
论文作者:www.51lunwen.org论文属性:作业 Assignment登出时间:2016-12-07编辑:cinq点击率:8529
论文字数:2500论文编号:org201612071724562120语种:英语 English地区:英国价格:免费论文
关键词:人力资源管理HRM留学作业
摘要:本文是HRM留学作业参考,主要内容是针对人力资本理论进行探讨,涉及人力资本增长理论的数据问题,包括外部性等方面内容。
人力资本增长理论的数据问题
Data Issues Of Human Capital Growth Theory
人力资本理论的出现作为一个潜在的重要变量引入增长理论早在1960年代、1970年代的经济学家如,舒尔茨(1960,1961),贝克尔(1975),和丹尼森(1962,1979)就已经提出,在概念提出了自己的观点,与人力资本形成的作用。罗默(1986,1990)将人力资本作为其长期增长模型的内生变量。他把知识作为一种内生因素转化为两部门模型的生产函数。他捕捉到了技术增长与人力资本之间的相互关系,指出了发展的方向和路径。自1990年以来,一直有一系列的研究工作的主题,而涵盖其不同的方面和规模不同的经济学家,直到如今。广义地说,除了其他,这些包括增长会计、劳动生产率、人力资本的外部性和教育。
Theory of human capital appeared as a potential important variable into the growth literature back in 1960's and 1970's. Economists such as Mincer (1958), Schultz (1960, 1961), Becker (1975), and Denison (1962, 1979), presented their view points on the concept, role and formation of human capital. Romer (1986, 1990) incorporated human capital as an endogenous variable [1] in his long-run growth model. He integrated knowledge as an endogenous factor into the production function in his two sector model. He captured the interrelation between technological growth and human capital and pointed out direction and path of the development. Since 1990, there has been a range of research work done on the topic, while covering its various aspects and dimensions by different economists till date. Broadly, in addition to others, these include growth accounting, labour productivity, human capital externalities and benefits of education.
The
essay however chooses few areas and proceeds as follows: section 2 discusses critically and summarises some of the work done with regard to identification and solution of data issues of human capital. Section 3 focuses mainly on the modelling issues and contributions of different economists. Section 4 highlights R & D spillovers and section 5 discusses some reflections on the potential impacts of the 'Great Recession'. Concluding remarks are drawn in the last section of the
essay.
Data Issues of Human Capital Growth Theory:
There have always been issues regarding measurement of human capital both conceptually and empirically. Conceptually, no single clear cut definition is found in the related literature on how capital should be represented. Years of schooling have generally been considered as a good proxy since long, however, having a look at the data, it is hard to believe that a country that increased its average years of schooling from 1 to 2 has doubled its stock of human capital and eventually doubled its output [2] (Cohen, 2007). Empirically the main problem is the inadequacy (Barro, 1993) and quality of the data itself as has been pointed out by De la Fuente & Domenech (2002, 2006). The later is of the opinion that the results of the contribution of human capital accumulation to economic growth have often been discouraging. While running growth regressions most of the times either the educational variable turn out to be insignificant or it has the wrong sign, particularly if they are estimated with first difference or panel specifications [3] .
Barro (1993) gave and described a new data set on educational attainment based on 129 countries covering a period from 1960 to 1985. He used census/survey figures to fill over 40 percent of the cells and the rest of the 60 percent are estimated from school enrolment data by a perpetual-inventory method. The data referred to male and female attainment of the adult population at four levels: no schooling, primary, secondary or higher. This also provided a rough break down into incomplete and complete attainment at the
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。