(3.237.97.64) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/05 03:09
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:羅曉惠
研究生(外文):Sheau-Hueay Luo
論文名稱:快速經濟成長下人力資本投資報酬率的變化─台灣實證
論文名稱(外文):Changing Rate of Return in Education under Rapid Economic Growth─Evidence from Taiwanese Household Survey
指導教授:陳建良陳建良引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chien-Liang Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立暨南國際大學
系所名稱:經濟學系
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:經濟學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:59
中文關鍵詞:人力資本投資教育投資報酬率家庭背景選擇性配對效果
外文關鍵詞:human capital investmentrate of return in educationfamily backgroundassortative mating
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:8
  • 點閱點閱:1892
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:548
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本研究方法係根據Lam(1993)和Schoeni(1994)提出的模型,加入家庭背景因素的考量,採用行政院主計處「台灣地區人力運用狀況調查」1990年和1995年的資料做實證分析。本研究試圖藉由多種家庭結構型態和不同取樣方法下的分析與比較,觀察台灣地區家庭在近來從事人力資本投資行為上之變化情形,探討家庭背景因素對教育投資報酬率的影響。
本研究實證結果顯示,當研究對象年齡是介於20歲至65歲,有主要有酬工作且和父母同住的男性戶長時:無論是1990年和1995年的資料都顯示,全部或私部門子樣本下,妻子的特性會影響男性戶長工資率;父親或母親的特性對男性戶長工資率不具解釋力。公部門子樣本下,妻子、父親或母親三者的特性對男性戶長工資率都不具解釋力。有兩個現象值得提出:妻子和男性戶長可能存在正的選擇性配對效果;當取樣樣本數太小,會造成樣本差異性不足使得各解釋變數都不顯著的結果。
當研究對象是至少包括20歲到65歲的男性戶長、一個兒子和一個媳婦的家庭時:在1995年的資料下,無論是妻子、父親或母親三者的特性都不具解釋力。在1990年的資料下,除了有明顯的正的選擇性配對效果之外,父親教育程度對兒子工資率也有解釋能力,且妻子特性對兒子工資率的影響程度大於父親特性對兒子工資率的影響;母親特性對兒子工資率沒有解釋能力。
由本研究實證結果,我們推論在台灣經濟快速成長下,近期的勞動市場上用人以學歷為取向,個人唯有擁有高文憑或其他能力的表現,才足以影響工資率的高低,家庭背景不似早期那麼重要了。
Research method of this study is proposed based on the model created by Lam (1993) and Schoeni (1994), and with the consideration for factors on family backgrounds, this study has accordingly utilized data from the Taiwan “Human Resource Utilization Survey”, of the years 1990 and 1995, respectively, from DGBAS of the Executive Yuan to proceed with the empirical analysis. This study attempts to observe the behavioral change of the human capital investment within the households in the Taiwan area through various analyses and comparisons on the multiple household structure patterns and different samplings, to further investigate the effects of the household backgrounds over the rate of return in education.
And according to the empirical results from this study, it is observed, that if the studied object is a paid labor aged between 20-65, as well as a male household head living with his parents, the characteristics of the wife are sure to affect the male household head’s income rate. And this result is acquired from the observed data of 1990 and 1995, with the sub-samples of the private sectors and of the public sectors both support the idea. However, characteristics of the father or of the mother do not emerge as an influential power over the male household head’s income rate. And with the sub-samples of the public sectors, it is believed that the characteristics of the wife, the father, or the mother does not help explain the change in the male household head’s income rate, and the following phenomena will be helpful to explain the situation: positive assortative mating might exist between the wife and the male household head and that if the number of samples is too small, it might produce deficiencies in the sample’s discrepancies, and thus, might result in inconspicuous explanatory variables.
Yet, if the studied object includes a family of a male household head aged at least 20-65, a son and a daughter-in-law, the result is different. For the 1995 data, it shows that none of the characteristics of the wife, the father, or the mother could explain the income rate. And for the 1990 data, except for the positive assortative mating that appears to be obvious, effects of the academic backgrounds of the father and the characteristics of the wife all appear to be influential, with the wife’s influential power being greater than the father’s, whereas the characteristics of the mother does not play any role in this situation.
Thus, from the empirical results of this study, we reason that, under the rapid economic development, the labor market of Taiwan is performing a new mechanism, and that is, to select the personnel through his/her academic backgrounds. And only with the individual’s outstanding academic background or his/her achievement will it be the factor to influence the income rate, whereas the family background no longer plays any influential role as what it used to be.
目 錄
第一章 緒論……………………………………………………………1 
第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………………………1
第二節 本文架構………………………………………………………3
第二章 文獻回顧………………………………………………………4
第一節 未納入家納入家庭背景因素的教育投資報酬.…………….4
第二節 納入家庭背景因素的教育投資報酬率………………………5
第三節 教育投資品質及數量…………………………………………8
第四節 人力資本的性別偏好…………………………………………8
第三章 實證方法…………………………………………………….12
第一節 實證方法的選擇…………………………………………….12
第二節 模型設定…………………………………………………….12
第四章 資料來源與基本統計量特性與分析……………………….15
第一節 資料來源與變數選取說明………………………………….15
第二節 基本統計資料特性與分析………………………………….18
第五章 實證結果與分析…………………………………………….22
第一節 分析來源為第一類組的資料……………………………….22
第二節 分析來源為第二類組的資料……………………………….30
第六章 結論與建議………………………………………………….34
第一節 結論………………………………………………………….34
第二節 建議………………………………………………………….36
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………37
表 次
表2-1 重要文獻比較表……………………………………………….11
表4-1.1 第一類組-11995年家庭背景特性基本統計量……………..40
表4-1.2 第一類組-1990年家庭背景特性基本統計量……………….41
表4-2.1 第二類組-1995年家庭背景特性基本統計量……………….42
表4-2.2 第二類組-1990年家庭背景特性基本統計量……………….43
表4-3 第一類組-全部樣本家庭(1995年)…………………………….44
表4-4 第一類組-公部門:夫妻皆存在家庭(1995年)………………..45
表4-5 第一類組-私部門:夫妻皆存在家庭(1995年)………………..46
表4-6 第一類組-公部門:夫妻皆存在且和父(或母)同住的家庭(1995年)47
表4-7 第一類組-私部門:夫妻皆存在且和父(或母)同住的家庭(1995年)48
表4-8 第一類組-全部樣本家庭(1990年)…………………………….49
表4-9 第一類組-公部門:夫妻皆存在家庭(1990年)…………………50
表4-10 第一類組-私部門:夫妻皆存在家庭(1990年)……………….51
表4-11 第一類組-公部門:夫妻皆存在且和父(或母)同住家庭(1990年)52
表4-12 第一類組-私部門:夫妻皆存在同和父(或母)同住家庭(1990年)53
表4-13 第二類組-全部樣本(1995年)……………………………………54
表4-14 第二類組-公部門樣本(1995年)………………………………55
表4-15 第二類組-私部門樣本(1995年)………………………………56
表4-16 第二類組-全部樣本家庭(1990年)……………………………57
表4-17 第二類組-公部門(1990年)……………………………………58
表4-18 第二類組-私部門樣本(1990年)………………………………59
一、中文部份
1.人力資源調查統計年報,行政院處,民國八十七年。
2.葉凱萍(1990)。「家庭決策行為的探討--台灣家庭孩子數、子女教育程度」國立台灣大學經濟研究所碩士論文。
3.符碧真(1996)。「教育投資報酬率長期變化之剖析─以我國教育發展個案為例」。教育研究資訊,4:1頁82-99。
4.白懿淳(1996)。「代間行為移轉之探討」。國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
5.陳建良(1996)。「家計單位內的資源配置─以台灣家計收支調查為對象的實證分析」。暨大學報,1:1,195-236。
6.陳建良(1999)。「人力資本與動態工資結構─台灣勞動市場的研究」。暨大學報,3:2,129-182。
7.吳慧瑛(2000)。「二十年來台灣地區教育發展之經濟評估」。
蔡貞慧、周穎政(2000)。「父母所得對子女接受高等教育的影響」。第三屆家庭與社會資源分配學術研討會論文集。
二、英文部份
1.Alderman, H. and Gertler, P.(1988), ”The Substitutability of Public and Private Health Care for the Treatment of Children in Pakistan”, Living Standards Measurement Study No.57, World Bank.
2.Armitage, J. and Sabot(1987), ”Socioeconomic Background and the Returns to Schooling in Two Low-Income Countries”, Economics,54:103-108.
3.Becker, G.S.,(1960),”Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis”, Journal of Political Economy,70(5),p9-49.
----1963, Human Capital- A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education, 1st ed. New Touk:Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.
---1974,“On the Relevance of the New Economics of the Family”, American Review. Vol. 64 (2). p 317-19. May 1974.
---1981,“Backer, Gary. (1981). A treatise on the family.”, Harvard University Press. Cambridge MA.
---1991,“Fertility and the Economy”, Economics Research Center/NORC PopulationResearch Center Discussion Paper:92-3. p 28. October 1991. ---1992, “Fertility and the Economy”, Journal of Population Economics. Vol.5(3). p 185-201.
---1993, “Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education”, Third edition. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. p xxii, 390. 1993.”,
4.Becker, G. and Tomes, N.(1979), "An Equilibrium Theory of the Distribution of Income and Intergenerational Mobility”, Journal of Political Economy, 87.6:1153-1189.
5.Behrman J.R. and Wolfe B.L.(1984a), ”Labor Force Participation and Earnings Determinants for Women in the Special Conditions of Developing Countries”, Journal of Development Economics, 15:259-288.
---1984b, “The Socioeconomic Impact of Schooling in a Developing Country”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 66.2:296-303.
---1984c, “More Evidence on Nutrition Demand: Income Seems Overrated and Women’s Schooling Underemphasized”, Journal of Development Economics, 14:105-128.
6.Carnoy(1967), “Earnings and Schooling in Mexico”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 15:408-419.
7.Greenhalph (1985), “Sexual stratification in East Asia: The other side of “growth with equity” in East Asia”, Population and Development Review, 11.2:265-314.
8.Jin-Tan Liu, James K. Hammitt, and Chyongchiou Jeng Lin(2000),”Family Background and Returns to Schooling in Taiwan.”, Economics of Education Review. Vol.19. p113-125.
9.Lam and Schoeni (1933), ”Effects of Family Background on Earnings and Returns to Schooling: Evidence from Brazil”, Journal of Political Economy,101.4:710-740.
10.Lillard ,Lee A. and Willis, Robert J.(1994),”Intergenerational Education Mobility: Effects of Family and State in Malaysia” ,The Journal of Human Resources. Vol.29(4). P1126-66.
11.Stelcner, M., Arriagada, A. and Moock, P.(1987), ”Wage Determinants andSchool Attainment Among Men in Peru”, Living Studies Measurement Study Working Paper No.38, World Bank.
12.Thomas, D(1990), ”Like Father, Like Mother, Like Daughter: Parental Resources and Child Height.” ,The Journal of Human Resources.
13.Thomas, D(1996), “Education Across Generations in South Africa.”, American Economic Review. Vol.86(2). P330-34
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔