我国经济转型期教育投资的就业效应

发布时间：2018-09-19 20:59

【摘要】：教育和就业是人类社会生存和发展的两大基础性活动,两者存在须臾相生的天然联系。在不同的历史发展时期,由于这种联系发生的外部环境不同,其表现形态也有所差别。自我国改革开放以后,教育投资持续增长,教育投资结构呈现新的特征；与此同时的就业现实却是,我们面临着巨大的就业压力,特别是伴随高等教育规模迅速扩展,出现了大学毕业生就业困难的局面,这使得人们开始质疑教育投资的人力资本功能。因此,这样的“悖论”需要人们对我国经济转型期两者的关系问题进行理性的考察。本文的研究主要回答两个问题：一是我国教育投资短期和长期内对就业量和就业结构产生了哪些影响?教育投资存在哪些就业效应?二是我国教育投资通过什么中间效应影响就业?找到了这一中介变量就找到了通过教育投资调节就业量的“按钮”。本文研究主体内容共分为四个部分：第一部分为教育投资就业效应的理论研究。包括第一章文献综述和第二章教育投资就业效应的理论分析。关于教育投资与就业关系的研究,西方理论界争论最激烈的是人力资本理论与以筛选理论和劳动力市场分割理论为代表的信号理论。这一部分研究了两大理论流派对于教育投资与就业关系的争论焦点主要在两个方面,一是教育投资是否对就业增长产生了积极影响,是教育投资通过什么机制影响就业。一言以蔽之,两大流派针锋相对的争论形成了教育投资影响就业的两种功能的认识：人力资本投资功能和信号筛选功能。第二章讨论了教育投资就业效应的理论框架。首先,基于西方的人力资本理论,将人力资本作为特定生产要素嵌入到生产函数模型中,分析教育投资形成的人力资本要素对就业总量的影响,包括短期和长期的影响,以及对就业结构的优化调整。本文认为,教育投资的人力资本效应产生存在时滞期,教育投资在短期内产生对就业的替代效应,长时期内产生就业促进的拉动效应；教育投资的增长不仅影响就业总量,而且对就业结构优化调整产生影响。另一方面,本文基于分割的劳动力市场理论,分析了相对基础教育层次具备“信号”功能的高等教育投资增长对劳动力市场的就业影响复杂的情况。本文认为,在分割的劳动力市场中,高等教育投资既可能增长主要劳动力市场和次要劳动力市场这两类市场的就业量,也可能加重两类市场的失业率,这与高等教育投资规模,以及现代部门生产增长速度紧密相关。就我国的情况来看,高校大规模扩招后,高等教育的扩张速度远远快于劳动力市场上需求的增长速度,短期内将造成就业压力,加剧了主要劳动力市场的供需矛盾,极端情况可能出现大面积的“过度教育”情况。第二部分为我国经济转型期教育投资对就业量和就业结构影响的经验检验,包括第三章和第四章。这一部分主要运用计量模型回答第一个问题,即：教育投资对就业总量在长短期内的影响。同时,这一部分也分析了教育投资对就业结构变化产生了怎样的影响。第三章实证研究我国经济转型期教育投资对就业总量的影响,考察了教育投资短期和长期的就业效应,包括教育投资的就业拉动效应、就业时滞效应、就业动态效应和对潜在就业增长的促进效应。首先,在分析我国经济转型期教育投资和就业的特征基础上,运用弹性这一经济学工具初步分析就业对教育投资的依存关系和特征。其次,运用分位数回归模型分析了经济转型期教育投资的就业拉动效应。研究结果说明,我国经济转型期教育投资的当期就业拉动作用越来越小,近10年教育投资的就业拉动效应比改革开放初期减少了约20%。再次,运用时滞模型分析我国教育投资对就业影响的时滞效应。实证结果表明：教育投资对就业的影响通常滞后2期,即当前的教育投资的就业效应会滞后2期后才产生作用；当期和前1期的教育投资对就业人员数有积极的促进作用,这是因为教育投资具有消费性生产功能。当期的教育投资对就业产生拉动效应,并且持续影响到滞后1期；而前2期的教育投资对就业人员数的增长有抑制作用,是因为教育投资在短时期内产生了对就业的替代效应。第四,运用协整方程和向量自回归模型分析教育投资的就业动态效应。研究发现：短时期内教育投资对就业产生替代效应；长时期内教育投资增长将促进就业增长,但教育投资对就业变化的解释力较小。第五,运用Hodrick-Prescott滤波模型分析教育投资对潜在就业增长的拉动效应。研究结果表明：教育投资并不能短期对就业缺口产生影响,实证结果表明这一时期是5年；然而,从长期来看,教育投资增长有利于减小就业缺口,尽管教育投资对弥补就业缺口的解释力较小。最后,分析了公共教育投资和非公共教育投资对就业的不同影响。研究发现,无论长期均衡模型时滞模型均表明,总体上看,公共教育投资对就业的积极作用比非公共教育投资显著。这因为两者投资重点不同,形成不同的教育投资影响就业的功能,进而对就业产生不同的效应。第四章是经济转型期的教育投资对就业结构影响的经验研究。研究发现,我国经济转型期教育投资对就业结构调整没有起到全面的积极作用,无论在短期内还是长期内,教育投资的增长没有带来第二产业和第三产业就业人员数的增长。这其中既有教育投资总量投资不足的问题,也有教育投资结构的问题。从促进就业增长的目标来看,基础教育比高等教育投资的贡献更优。从长期看,农村基础教育投资对农业劳动力转移产生积极影响,尽管其正向作用微弱；基础教育投资对第二产业和第三产业的就业人员增长产生微弱的促进效应。相比高等教育投资对我国就业结构调整的影响来看,基础教育投资变化拉动二三产业就业人数增长的作用更明显。研究同时发现,我国经济转型期内由高等教育投资增长引起的就业压力不是长期的,而是存在于一定的时期,高等教育投资既有促进就业增长优化就业结构的阶段,也有产生就业替代的阶段,两种效应交互出现。高等教育投资对农村劳动力的非农就业,以及第二产业就业人员数量增长的对就业的替代效应更显著,而促进第三产就业增长的作用比较显著。第三部分研究教育投资与就业之间的中介效应问题,这是第五章的研究内容,主要回答第二个问题。在运用生产函数进行数量推导基础上,构建了本章关于中介变量的分析框架。首先,讨论经济增长、劳动生产率作为教育投资影响就业的中介变量的不确定性问题。然后,研究了工资弹性作为教育投资就业效应的中介变量问题。考虑到我国经济转型期工资弹性发挥作用的外部条件是劳动力市场化程度较高,将实证的样本期分为1978-2008年和1993-2008年两个期间进行中介变量的实证研究,以便比较不同劳动力市场化水平下,工资弹性作为中介变量对教育投资与就业增长关系的影响。实证研究发现,我国经济转型期的工资弹性没有起到中介效应,但是,1993-2008年样本期的回归模型中工资弹性中介效应显著性的概率已经接近0.10的显著水平,比1978-1993年的工资弹性作为中介效应的显著性提高了近5倍。教育投资对就业影响的中介效应研究结论,一方面解释了我国教育投资就业增长产生的作用较小,并且未能与就业结构调整形成全面良性互动关系的原因,是由于工资弹性的中介效应不显著。这样的研究结论暗含着不同于人力资本理论和信号筛选理论所主张的政策含义。人力资本理论主张教育投资通过提高了劳动生产率进而促进经济增长和就业增长,其政策含义是提倡加大教育投资力度,强调通过教育和培训提高受教育劳动生产率,实现就业增长。争锋相对的教育信号筛选理论主张,教育投资对整体就业水平没有影响,在分割的劳动力市场中教育仅仅是个筛选的机制,其政策含义是促进就业不能依赖教育投资。本文的研究结论丰富了上述争论,同时也提示我们,为了实现教育投资的就业效应,可以通过调节中介变量工资弹性得以实现,而中介效应功能得以实现需要其它条件的制约,如劳动力市场化程度。从我国的实际情况来看,要发挥中介效应的作用与两个条件有关,其一是来自人力资本贡献的劳动生产率持续提高,其二是要有比较完善的、连续的劳动力市场,为不同人力资本的劳动力在行业、产业和部门之间无障碍流动创造条件。第四部分为对策建议部分。本文认为,首先必须要把教育投资与就业结合在一起来考虑,实施就业优先的教育投资战略。如果不能实现就业目标的教育投资则不具备生产性,只能体现出消费性的属性。据此,本文提出如下对策：实施积极的教育投资政策,提高劳动力素质,发挥教育投资人力资本功能,促进我国就业困境的解决；加强基础教育投资,尤其加强农村基础教育投资,缩小城乡人力资本差距；建立以需求为导向的高等教育投资,保持与我国社会经济发展相适度的高等规模,防止过度教育长时期大规模发生；提高劳动力市场化程度,主要从制度上减少分割性,构建提高工资弹性的劳动力市场环境。
[Abstract]:Education and employment are two basic activities for the survival and development of human society, and there are natural links between them. In different historical periods, because of the different external environment, the manifestations of these links are also different. At the same time, the employment reality is that we are facing enormous employment pressure, especially with the rapid expansion of the scale of higher education, the employment of university graduates is difficult, which makes people begin to question the human capital function of education investment. A rational study of the relationship between them.
This paper mainly answers two questions: firstly, what impact does education investment have on employment quantity and employment structure in the short and long term? What employment effect does education investment have? Secondly, through what intermediate effect does education investment affect employment? Finding this intermediary variable, we can find the adjustment through education investment. The volume of the "button".
The main contents of the study are divided into four parts.
The first part is the theoretical study of the employment effect of educational investment, including the first chapter literature review and the second chapter theoretical analysis of the employment effect of educational investment. In this part, the author studies the two major schools'debates on the relationship between education investment and employment mainly in two aspects. One is whether education investment has a positive impact on employment growth, and the mechanism through which education investment affects employment. The two functions of employment: human capital investment function and signal screening function.
The second chapter discusses the theoretical framework of the employment effect of educational investment. Firstly, based on the western human capital theory, human capital is embedded into the production function model as a specific factor of production, and the impact of human capital factors formed by educational investment on the total employment is analyzed, including the short-term and long-term impact, as well as the optimization of employment structure. This paper argues that there is a time lag in the human capital effect of education investment, that is, the substitution effect of education investment on employment in the short term and the pull effect of employment promotion in the long term. The growth of education investment not only affects the total employment, but also affects the optimization and adjustment of employment structure. Based on the theory of labor market segmentation, this paper analyzes the complicated situation that the growth of investment in higher education, which has the function of "signal" relative to the basic education level, has an impact on the employment of the labor market. Employment may also aggravate the unemployment rate in the two markets, which is closely related to the scale of investment in higher education and the growth rate of production in the modern sector. This has exacerbated the contradiction between supply and demand in the main labor market, and in extreme cases there may be a large area of "over-education".
The second part is the empirical test of the impact of education investment on employment and employment structure in China's economic transition period, including the third and fourth chapters. Chapter three empirically studies the impact of education investment on the total employment in the period of economic transition in China, examines the short-term and long-term employment effects of education investment, including the employment pull effect of education investment, employment lag effect, employment dynamic effect and the promotion effect on the potential employment growth. On the basis of the characteristics of education investment and employment in China's economic transition period, this paper uses elasticity as an economic tool to analyze the dependence and characteristics of employment on education investment. Thirdly, the time-lag model is used to analyze the time-lag effect of China's education investment on employment. The empirical results show that the impact of education investment on employment usually lags behind two periods, that is, the employment effect of current education investment. The education investment in the current period and the first period has a positive effect on the number of employed persons, because the education investment has the function of consumptive production. Fourthly, we use the co-integration equation and vector autoregressive model to analyze the dynamic effect of education investment on employment. Fifthly, the Hodrick-Prescott filter model is used to analyze the pull effect of education investment on the potential employment growth. The results show that education investment can not affect the employment gap in the short term, the empirical results show that this period is five years; however, in the long run, the growth of education investment has some effects. Finally, the different effects of public education investment and non-public education investment on employment are analyzed. It is found that both long-term equilibrium model and time-lag model show that, on the whole, public education investment has a more positive effect on employment than non-public education. This is because the two investment priorities are different, forming a different education investment affect the function of employment, and then have different effects on employment.
The fourth chapter is the empirical study on the impact of education investment on employment structure in the period of economic transition.The study finds that education investment has not played a positive role in the adjustment of employment structure. In the long run, rural basic education investment has a positive impact on the transfer of agricultural labor force, although its positive effect is weak. Compared with the impact of higher education investment on the adjustment of employment structure in China, the change of investment in basic education plays a more significant role in stimulating the growth of employment in secondary and tertiary industries. The long-term employment pressure is not long-term, but exists in a certain period of time. Higher education investment not only promotes employment growth and optimizes employment structure, but also produces employment substitution stage. The two effects interact. Higher education investment on non-agricultural employment of rural labor force, and the number of employment personnel in the secondary industry increases. The substitution effect for employment is more significant, while the promotion of employment growth in the third industry is more significant.
The third part studies the intermediary effect between education investment and employment, which is the research content of the fifth chapter, mainly answering the second question. On the basis of quantitative deduction using production function, this chapter constructs the analysis framework of intermediary variable. First, it discusses the economic growth, labor productivity as education investment affects employment. Secondly, this paper studies the problem of wage elasticity as an intermediary variable of the effect of education investment and employment. Considering that the external condition of wage elasticity in China's economic transition period is the high degree of labor marketization, the empirical sample period is divided into 1978-2008 and 1993-2008 for intermediary change. Empirical study shows that wage elasticity has no mediating effect on the relationship between education investment and employment growth in China's economic transition period, but the mediating effect of wage elasticity is significant in the regression model of the sample period 1993-2008. The probability of sex has approached the significant level of 0.10, which is nearly five times higher than that of the wage elasticity from 1978 to 1993. The conclusion of the study on the intermediary effect of education investment on employment explains that the employment growth of education investment in China has little effect, and it has not been able to form a comprehensive benign employment structure adjustment. This conclusion implies different policy implications from those advocated by human capital theory and signal screening theory. Human capital theory advocates that education investment promotes economic growth and employment growth by increasing labor productivity. We advocate increasing investment in education, emphasizing increasing the productivity of educated labor through education and training, and realizing employment growth.The competing theory of educational signal screening holds that education investment has no effect on the overall employment level, and education is only a screening mechanism in the separated labor market. Its policy implication is that employment cannot be promoted. The conclusion of this study enriches the above-mentioned controversy, and also suggests that in order to realize the employment effect of education investment, wage elasticity can be realized by adjusting the intermediary variable, while the intermediary effect can be realized under the restriction of other conditions, such as the degree of labor market. The role of intermediary effect is related to two conditions, one is the continuous improvement of labor productivity from the contribution of human capital, the other is to have a relatively perfect and continuous labor market to create conditions for the barrier-free flow of labor among industries, industries and departments with different human capital.
The fourth part is the countermeasure and suggestion part.This article thinks that we must first consider the education investment and employment together and implement the strategy of education investment with priority of employment.If we can't realize the goal of employment, the education investment will not be productive and can only reflect the attributes of consumption.Accordingly, this paper puts forward the following countermeasures:implement actively. Education investment policy should improve the quality of labor force, give full play to the function of human capital in education investment, and promote the solution of employment dilemma in China; strengthen investment in basic education, especially in rural basic education, to narrow the gap between urban and rural human capital; establish demand-oriented investment in higher education to keep pace with China's social and economic development. The higher scale of the system can prevent the large-scale occurrence of over-education for a long time, and improve the marketization of the labor force mainly by reducing the division of the system and building a labor market environment to improve wage elasticity.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：G521;F224

【参考文献】