IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Returns to university education; evidence from an institutional reform

  • Dinand Webbink

    ()

Registered author(s):

    In 1982, duration of university education in the Netherlands decreased from five to four years. This institutional reform is exploited for estimating the causal effect of one year of university education on wages in 1997. Wages of employees who enrolled just before or after the reform are compared using data from the Dutch Wage Structure Survey of 1997. We find that the fifth year of university education increased wages with 7 to 9 percent. This wage differential is found for employees enrolling four years before or after the reform. Confounding factors like time-effects, typical age-effects or ability-bias do not seem to bias the main results. The findings suggest that there is scope for increasing private contributions of students. Moreover, the reform may have harmed total welfare. Alternative policies of sticking to five-year duration and increasing private contributions for higher education could have given a more favourable outcome.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/returns-university-education-evidence-institutional-reform.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis in its series CPB Discussion Paper with number 34.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: Jul 2004
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:34
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Postbus 80510, 2508 GM Den Haag
    Phone: (070) 338 33 80
    Fax: (070) 338 33 50
    Web page: http://www.cpb.nl/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Costas Meghir & Mårten Palme, 2001. "The effect of a social experiment in education," IFS Working Papers W01/11, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Adriaan Kalwij, 2000. "Estimating the economic return to schooling on the basis of panel data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 61-71.
    3. Orley Ashenfelter & Colm Harmon & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2000. "A Review of Estimates of the Schooling/Earnings Relationship, with Tests for Publication Bias," NBER Working Papers 7457, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Aakvik, Arild & Salvanes, Kjell G. & Vaage, Kjell, 2003. "Measuring Heterogeneity in the Returns to Education in Norway Using Educational Reforms," Working Papers in Economics 08/03, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    5. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Krueger, 1990. "Does Compulsory School Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?," NBER Working Papers 3572, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Levin, Jesse & Plug, Erik J. S., 1999. "Instrumenting education and the returns to schooling in the Netherlands," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 521-534, November.
    7. Wilbert van der Klaauw, 2002. "Estimating the Effect of Financial Aid Offers on College Enrollment: A Regression-Discontinuity Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1249-1287, November.
    8. Edwin Leuven & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2002. "Evaluating the effect of tax deductions on training," Labor and Demography 0205001, EconWPA.
    9. Harmon, Colm & Walker, Ian, 1995. "Estimates of the Economic Return to Schooling for the United Kingdom," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1278-86, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:34. 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: ()

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.