IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/deveco/v167y2024ics030438782300189x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Better together? Student's benefits of educational market integration

Author

Listed:
  • Allende, Claudio
  • Luksic, Juan Diego
  • Navarrete H, Nicolas

Abstract

Educational market integration have become a common practice in various countries, changing potentially student's application and enrollment behavior. We implement a difference-indifference estimation exploiting student's geographic exposure to market integration in Chile to understand student's gain and losses from this process. Using administrative data, we show that the market integration process has no effect on overall university enrollment but changes the enrollment composition: new platform institutions increased enrollment and old ones decreased. The reduction in application costs and the release of additional information, particularly historical cutoff data, seem to play a more significant role in shaping these dynamics than the congestion reduction. Heterogeneity analysis shows that low-income students enrollment increase, reflecting application barriers to decentralized admission institutions and implying gains in equity and efficiency of the system.

Suggested Citation

  • Allende, Claudio & Luksic, Juan Diego & Navarrete H, Nicolas, 2024. "Better together? Student's benefits of educational market integration," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:deveco:v:167:y:2024:i:c:s030438782300189x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2023.103233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438782300189X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2023.103233?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C de Chaisemartin & X D’HaultfŒuille, 2018. "Fuzzy Differences-in-Differences," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(2), pages 999-1028.
    2. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    3. Davide Cantoni & Noam Yuchtman, 2014. "Medieval Universities, Legal Institutions, and the Commercial Revolution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(2), pages 823-887.
    4. Caterina Calsamiglia & Chao Fu & Maia Güell, 2020. "Structural Estimation of a Model of School Choices: The Boston Mechanism versus Its Alternatives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(2), pages 642-680.
    5. Zachary Bleemer, 2022. "Affirmative Action, Mismatch, and Economic Mobility after California’s Proposition 209," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(1), pages 115-160.
    6. Hafalir, Isa E. & Hakimov, Rustamdjan & Kübler, Dorothea & Kurino, Morimitsu, 2018. "College admissions with entrance exams: Centralized versus decentralized," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 886-934.
    7. Sandra E. Black & Jeffrey T. Denning & Jesse Rothstein, 2023. "Winners and Losers? The Effect of Gaining and Losing Access to Selective Colleges on Education and Labor Market Outcomes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 26-67, January.
    8. de Chaisemartin, Clement & D'Haultfoeuille, Xavier, 2014. "Fuzzy Changes-in Changes," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 184, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Janet Currie & Enrico Moretti, 2003. "Mother's Education and the Intergenerational Transmission of Human Capital: Evidence from College Openings," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(4), pages 1495-1532.
    10. Marc Frenette, 2006. "Too Far to Go On? Distance to School and University Participation," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 31-58.
    11. Roth, Alvin E & Xing, Xiaolin, 1997. "Turnaround Time and Bottlenecks in Market Clearing: Decentralized Matching in the Market for Clinical Psychologists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 284-329, April.
    12. Machado, Cecilia & Szerman, Christiane, 2021. "Centralized college admissions and student composition," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    13. Jacob D Leshno & Irene Lo, 2021. "The Cutoff Structure of Top Trading Cycles in School Choice [The Welfare Effects of Coordinated Assignment: Evidence from the New York City High School Match]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(4), pages 1582-1623.
    14. Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Market Culture: How Rules Governing Exploding Offers Affect Market Performance," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 199-219, August.
    15. Atila Abdulkadiroğlu & Nikhil Agarwal & Parag A. Pathak, 2017. "The Welfare Effects of Coordinated Assignment: Evidence from the New York City High School Match," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3635-3689, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Machado, Cecilia & Szerman, Christiane, 2021. "Centralized college admissions and student composition," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    2. YingHua He & Thierry Magnac, 2022. "Application Costs and Congestion in Matching Markets," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2918-2950.
    3. Isabella Giorgetti & Matteo Picchio, 2021. "One billion euro programme for early childcare services in Italy," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 460-492, July.
    4. Bautista, M. A. & González, F. & Martínez, L. R. & Muñoz, P. & Prem, M., 2020. "Chile’s Missing Students: Dictatorship, Higher Education and Social Mobility," Documentos de Trabajo 18163, Universidad del Rosario.
    5. Eric Budish & Judd B. Kessler, 2022. "Can Market Participants Report Their Preferences Accurately (Enough)?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1107-1130, February.
    6. Roth, Jonathan & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Bilinski, Alyssa & Poe, John, 2023. "What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 2218-2244.
    7. Bautista, María Angélica & Gonzalez, Felipe & Martinez, Luis R. & Muñoz, Pablo & Prem, Mounu, 2022. "The Intergenerational Transmission of College: Evidence from the 1973 Coup in Chile," SocArXiv eyw2a, Center for Open Science.
    8. Cecilia Machado & Germ'an Reyes & Evan Riehl, 2023. "The Direct and Spillover Effects of Large-scale Affirmative Action at an Elite Brazilian University," Papers 2305.02513, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    9. Patricia I. Ritter & Ricardo A. Sanchez, 2023. "The effects of an epidemic on prenatal investments, childhood mortality and health of surviving children," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 505-544, January.
    10. Cecilia Machado & Germán Reyes & Evan Riehl, 2023. "The Efficacy of Large-Scale Affirmative Action at Elite Universities," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0311, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    11. Bruce Hollingsworth & Asako Ohinata & Matteo Picchio & Ian Walker, 2022. "The Impacts of Free Universal Elderly Care on the Supply of Informal Care and Labour Supply," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 84(4), pages 933-960, August.
    12. Klijn, Flip & Pais, Joana & Vorsatz, Marc, 2019. "Static versus dynamic deferred acceptance in school choice: Theory and experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 147-163.
    13. Peter Coles & John Cawley & Phillip B. Levine & Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth & John J. Siegfried, 2010. "The Job Market for New Economists: A Market Design Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(4), pages 187-206, Fall.
    14. Scott Carrell & Bruce Sacerdote, 2017. "Why Do College-Going Interventions Work?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 124-151, July.
    15. Sonia Bhalotra & Abhishek Chakravarty & Dilip Mookherjee & Francisco J. Pino, 2019. "Property Rights and Gender Bias: Evidence from Land Reform in West Bengal," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 205-237, April.
    16. Fitzsimons, Emla & Malde, Bansi & Mesnard, Alice & Vera-Hernández, Marcos, 2016. "Nutrition, information and household behavior: Experimental evidence from Malawi," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 113-126.
    17. Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes & Neeraj Kaushal & Ashley N. Muchow, 2021. "Timing of social distancing policies and COVID-19 mortality: county-level evidence from the U.S," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(4), pages 1445-1472, October.
    18. Tong Wang & Congyi Zhou, 2020. "High school admission reform in China: a welfare analysis," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 24(3), pages 215-269, December.
    19. Nikolov, Plamen & Jimi, Nusrat & Chang, Jerray, 2020. "The Importance of Cognitive Domains and the Returns to Schooling in South Africa: Evidence from Two Labor Surveys," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. Christopher Neilson & Adam Kapor & Mohit Karnani, 2020. "Aftermarket Frictions and the Cost of Off-Platform Options in Centralized Assignment Mechanisms," Working Papers 635a, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:deveco:v:167:y:2024:i:c:s030438782300189x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/devec .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.