University choice, peer group and distance
We analyze how authorizing a new university affects welfare when the students’ education depends on the peer group effect. Students are horizontally differentiated according to their ability and the distance from the university. Comparing a monopolistic university with a two-universities model we find that allowing a “new” university is welfare improving when the monopolistic university is only attended by able students with less mobility constraints. This occurs when mobility costs are sufficiently high. When mobility costs are low, a negative externality arises and welfare decreases. The negative externality comes through the peer group effect - high ability students that would have gone to the monopolistic university go to the university with the lower average ability. These students end up in a university with students whose ability was not high enough to go to the monopolist. On the other hand, students remaining in the good university benefit from a lower average ability. Thus, a new university is welfare improving only for those with low ability that in the monopolistic scenario would remain unskilled. When, instead, the mobility cost is high, the monopolist leaves out a significative mass of individuals. In this case, no negative externality arises because no student swaps university therefore a "new" university is welfare improving. However, this welfare improvement makes the opportunities for a higher education less equal (according to Romer, 1998) because an "external circumstance" like mobility cost, rather than own ability, becomes the main determinant of the students’ human capital.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Via S. Giorgio 12, I-09124 Cagliari|
Web page: http://www.crenos.unica.it/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Giorgio Brunello & Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2009.
"Peer Effects in Higher Education: Does the Field of Study Matter?,"
"Marco Fanno" Working Papers
0092, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
- Giorgio Brunello & Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2010. "Peer Effects In Higher Education: Does The Field Of Study Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(3), pages 621-634, 07.
- De Fraja, Gianni & Iossa, Elisabetta, 2002. "Competition among Universities and the Emergence of the Elite Institution," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 275-93, July.
- Carla Sá & Raymond Florax & Piet Rietveld, 2006.
"Does Accessibility to Higher Education Matter? Choice Behaviour of High School Graduates in the Netherlands,"
Spatial Economic Analysis,
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 155-174.
- Carla Sá & Raymond J.G.M. Florax & Piet Rietveld, 2004. "Does Accessibility to Higher Education matter? Choice Behavior of High School Graduates in the Netherlands," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-061/3, Tinbergen Institute.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cns:cnscwp:201101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Antonello Pau)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.