Author
Abstract
Purpose - This study aims to investigate the extent to which overeducation imposes wage effects on university graduates, taking into account the individual heterogeneity due to skills and innate ability. Design/methodology/approach - Using Graduates Occupation and Mobility Survey (GOMS) 2019 and Korea Dictionary of Occupations (KDOT) 2019, the overeducated and adequately educated graduates are differentiated by the job analysis (JA) measure. To unveil the masked results, the unconditional quantile regression (UQR) accompanying skills and field of study mismatches is adopted to explore the wage effects of overeducation across the overall wage distribution. Findings - Empirical evidence shows that the incidence of overeducation is high; however, overeducated graduates only suffer a 6.5% wage loss relative to their adequately matched peers. The findings indicate that regardless of being derived from either overskilled or field of study mismatch, genuine overeducation impose a higher wage penalty at all percentiles relative to the apparent overeducation. Meanwhile, high-ability men suffer lower-wage penalties than their low-ability peers, whereas the inverted “U” pattern is exhibited for women. The theoretical hypotheses differ depending on the estimated results by gender. Research limitations/implications - Each measure of educational mismatch has been criticized for its insurmountable shortcoming. The recent graduates are likely to overstate the job requires of skills. Originality/value - This paper contributes to the insufficient evidence on the multiple aspects of wage effects of overeducation by providing new and rigorous examinations and by focusing on the country experiencing rapid economic growth, industrial upgrading and educational expansion.
Suggested Citation
Hongye Sun & Giseung Kim, 2021.
"The wage effects of overeducation across overall wage distribution on university graduates: incidence, heterogeneity and comparison,"
International Journal of Manpower, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 43(5), pages 1144-1165, December.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ijmpps:ijm-03-2021-0181
DOI: 10.1108/IJM-03-2021-0181
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:eme:ijmpps:ijm-03-2021-0181. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.