HIGHER EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

INDIA, CHINA, AND THE 21ST CENTURY

Martin Carnoy, Stanford University

Projected GDP/CapitaProjected GDP/Capita

Figure 1: Projected GDP/capita, BRICs, Japan, and the United States, 2000-2050 (U.S. 2000 $)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

GD

P/c

ap

ita (

US

$)

Brazil China India Russia Japan U.S.

Figure 1: Projected GDP/capita, BRICs, Japan, and the United States, 2000-2050 (U.S. 2000 $)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

GD

P/c

ap

ita (

US

$)

Brazil China India Russia Japan U.S.

Can These Projections for the BRICs be Realized?

Can These Projections for the BRICs be Realized?

As we have discussed in the past two days, many factors enter into assessing the possibilities for India and China in the future.

I want to focus on one factor that has not been discussed much until now--the role of education, particularly higher education, in future economic growth.

In the new knowledge based global economy, a higher educated labor force is probably essential for developing new, high yield opportunities for growth.

As we have discussed in the past two days, many factors enter into assessing the possibilities for India and China in the future.

I want to focus on one factor that has not been discussed much until now--the role of education, particularly higher education, in future economic growth.

In the new knowledge based global economy, a higher educated labor force is probably essential for developing new, high yield opportunities for growth.

Direction of the ArgumentDirection of the Argument

In this paper, I argue that the empirical literature on education suggests that higher educated labor contributes to economic growth and that the payoff to investment in higher education is rising.

I show that India and China are not moving down the same path in their higher education strategies, and that both may be sub-optimal.

I also suggest that the quality of higher education in both countries is generally low, and that we know little about what either country is doing to raise quality.

In this paper, I argue that the empirical literature on education suggests that higher educated labor contributes to economic growth and that the payoff to investment in higher education is rising.

I show that India and China are not moving down the same path in their higher education strategies, and that both may be sub-optimal.

I also suggest that the quality of higher education in both countries is generally low, and that we know little about what either country is doing to raise quality.

Education and Economic GrowthEducation and Economic Growth

Economic research has taken two approaches to the education and growth issue: macroeconomic (growth accounting); and microeconomic (rates of return to education).

Macroeconomic approaches emphasize the correlation between the stock of human capital and the increase in economic output per capita.

They suggest that there is a positive relation between initial stocks of educated labor and later growth, but little relation between investment in education and growth. They also suggest the contribution of higher levels of education to growth is generally positive, particularly in more developed countries.

Economic research has taken two approaches to the education and growth issue: macroeconomic (growth accounting); and microeconomic (rates of return to education).

Macroeconomic approaches emphasize the correlation between the stock of human capital and the increase in economic output per capita.

They suggest that there is a positive relation between initial stocks of educated labor and later growth, but little relation between investment in education and growth. They also suggest the contribution of higher levels of education to growth is generally positive, particularly in more developed countries.

Rates of Return to Education

Rates of Return to Education

Higher the rates of return to education the higher the positive contribution of investing in education to economic growth.

For decades, the WB was convinced that RORs were highest for primary education and that the pattern was invariate over time. This became prevailing view.

Turned out not to be the case. Although rates of return to education vary among countries, a dominant tendency worldwide in the past thirty years is for RORs to lower levels of schooling to fall, and for RORs to higher levels of schooling to rise.

Higher the rates of return to education the higher the positive contribution of investing in education to economic growth.

For decades, the WB was convinced that RORs were highest for primary education and that the pattern was invariate over time. This became prevailing view.

Turned out not to be the case. Although rates of return to education vary among countries, a dominant tendency worldwide in the past thirty years is for RORs to lower levels of schooling to fall, and for RORs to higher levels of schooling to rise.

Rates of Return Across Countries and Time

Rates of Return Across Countries and Time

Private Rate of Return Social Rate of Return Country Primary Secondary Tertiary Primary Secondary Tertiary

Egypt 1988* 5 6 9 Egypt 1998* 5 6 8 Jordan 1997* 3 9 7 Jordan 2004* 2 4 9 Morocco 1991* 8 9 12 9 10 Morocco 1999* 5 8 9 8 9 Yeme n 1997* 3 2 4 Indonesia 1977 25 16 Indonesia 1978 22 16 15 Indonesia 1989 11 5 Korea 1974 20 19 16 12 Korea 1979 14 19 11 12 Korea 1986 10 19 8 12 Philippines 1971 9 6 10 7 6 8 Philippines 1977 16 8 Philippines 1988 18 10 12 13 9 10

Private Rate of Return Social Rate of Return Country Primary Secondary Tertiary Primary Secondary Tertiary

Egypt 1988* 5 6 9 Egypt 1998* 5 6 8 Jordan 1997* 3 9 7 Jordan 2004* 2 4 9 Morocco 1991* 8 9 12 9 10 Morocco 1999* 5 8 9 8 9 Yeme n 1997* 3 2 4 Indonesia 1977 25 16 Indonesia 1978 22 16 15 Indonesia 1989 11 5 Korea 1974 20 19 16 12 Korea 1979 14 19 11 12 Korea 1986 10 19 8 12 Philippines 1971 9 6 10 7 6 8 Philippines 1977 16 8 Philippines 1988 18 10 12 13 9 10

Rates of Return in ChinaRates of Return in China Most rate of return studies in the 1990s showed low

private rates of return in China. Li found, using wage data, rising private rates of return to secondary plus higher education--from 6 % in 1980 to 9.2% in 1980-87 to 9.5 in 1988-95. Others got similar results.

Also found higher RORs in less developed areas and lower RORs in more developed provinces.

But as Fleischer and Chen show, wages are good measures of private rates of return but poor measures of productivity, particularly of workers with higher levels of education. Using contributions to TFP, they estimated RORs to higher education of about 35%.

Most rate of return studies in the 1990s showed low private rates of return in China. Li found, using wage data, rising private rates of return to secondary plus higher education--from 6 % in 1980 to 9.2% in 1980-87 to 9.5 in 1988-95. Others got similar results.

Also found higher RORs in less developed areas and lower RORs in more developed provinces.

But as Fleischer and Chen show, wages are good measures of private rates of return but poor measures of productivity, particularly of workers with higher levels of education. Using contributions to TFP, they estimated RORs to higher education of about 35%.

Private Rates of Return in IndiaPrivate Rates of Return in India

Primary School

Middle School

Secondary School

Upper Secondary

College BA

College Engineering

Nallagounden (1967) 23.0 13.0 10.0 8.1 Blaug et al (1969) 18.7 16.1 11.9 10.4 Kothari (1967, 1970) 14.0 25.0 Blaug (1972) 16.5 14.0 10.4 8.7 Psacharopoulos (1973) 24.7 19.2 14.3 Goel (1975) 10.4É¡ 10.1 6.0 6.4

Pandit (1976) 17.3 18.8 5.0 5.20 9.21 Shortlidge (1974) 16.2 Tilak (1987) 33.4 25.0 19.8 14.01 13.2 Tilak (1987) 7.82 8.54 negative 2.4 6.82 Rao and Datta (1989) 5.3 5.07 Duraisamy (2002) 7.9 7.4 17.3 9.3 11.7 14.6 Duraisamy (2002) 7.8 7.4 17.7 9.7 12.7 16.6 Source: This table is based on a similar table in Asaoka, 2006. Original sources are: Heyneman (1980, p.146); Psacharopoulos (1973, p.62); Tilak (1987, p. 52, p. 85) Duraisamy (2000, p.22); Rao and Datta (1989, p.377) Note: ɡ: over illiterates; : Agricultural college only; ɬ: Unadjusted estimate; ɦ: Adjusted estimate

Primary School

Middle School

Secondary School

Upper Secondary

College BA

College Engineering

Nallagounden (1967) 23.0 13.0 10.0 8.1 Blaug et al (1969) 18.7 16.1 11.9 10.4 Kothari (1967, 1970) 14.0 25.0 Blaug (1972) 16.5 14.0 10.4 8.7 Psacharopoulos (1973) 24.7 19.2 14.3 Goel (1975) 10.4É¡ 10.1 6.0 6.4

Pandit (1976) 17.3 18.8 5.0 5.20 9.21 Shortlidge (1974) 16.2 Tilak (1987) 33.4 25.0 19.8 14.01 13.2 Tilak (1987) 7.82 8.54 negative 2.4 6.82 Rao and Datta (1989) 5.3 5.07 Duraisamy (2002) 7.9 7.4 17.3 9.3 11.7 14.6 Duraisamy (2002) 7.8 7.4 17.7 9.7 12.7 16.6 Source: This table is based on a similar table in Asaoka, 2006. Original sources are: Heyneman (1980, p.146); Psacharopoulos (1973, p.62); Tilak (1987, p. 52, p. 85) Duraisamy (2000, p.22); Rao and Datta (1989, p.377) Note: ɡ: over illiterates; : Agricultural college only; ɬ: Unadjusted estimate; ɦ: Adjusted estimate

Rates of Return to Education in India

Rates of Return to Education in India

Tilak show rates falling over time in India to primary, middle, and secondary school, and rising to investment in university. The rate is consistently higher to university in each of the three years--reaching 10% in 1999.

Asaoka suggests that private rates of return to university completion for men in urban areas in 16 Indian states in 1993 were positively and significantly correlated with the state’s GDP per capita. Thus, rates of return to university completion are higher in states that are more developed, the opposite relationship from what Fleisher and Yang found in China in the 1990s.

Tilak show rates falling over time in India to primary, middle, and secondary school, and rising to investment in university. The rate is consistently higher to university in each of the three years--reaching 10% in 1999.

Asaoka suggests that private rates of return to university completion for men in urban areas in 16 Indian states in 1993 were positively and significantly correlated with the state’s GDP per capita. Thus, rates of return to university completion are higher in states that are more developed, the opposite relationship from what Fleisher and Yang found in China in the 1990s.

Higher Education Enrollment in China and

India

Higher Education Enrollment in China and

IndiaChina has achieved high rates of growth without much investment in higher education--one lesson may be that it could have done even better with more higher educated labor. Now they are expanding the HE system rapidly.

India also has a relatively very low fraction of higher educated labor. Enrollment is expanding rapidly in absolute terms but slowly relative to the size of the age cohort.

China has achieved high rates of growth without much investment in higher education--one lesson may be that it could have done even better with more higher educated labor. Now they are expanding the HE system rapidly.

India also has a relatively very low fraction of higher educated labor. Enrollment is expanding rapidly in absolute terms but slowly relative to the size of the age cohort.

Enrollment Growth in the BRICs

Enrollment Growth in the BRICs

Table 3. Gross Secondary and Tertiary Level Enrollment Rates, by Country, 1970-2003 1970 1985 2001 2003 Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Brazil 26 5 35 11 108 18 109 21 China 30 1 40 3 62 10 70 16 India 38 6 48 10 52 12 Russian Federation 45-50a 93 69 Source: World Ban k Indicators {http://devdata.worldb ank.org/dataonline/} Note: a. Imputed by author.

Table 3. Gross Secondary and Tertiary Level Enrollment Rates, by Country, 1970-2003 1970 1985 2001 2003 Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Secondary Higher Brazil 26 5 35 11 108 18 109 21 China 30 1 40 3 62 10 70 16 India 38 6 48 10 52 12 Russian Federation 45-50a 93 69 Source: World Ban k Indicators {http://devdata.worldb ank.org/dataonline/} Note: a. Imputed by author.

The Changing Financing of Higher Education

The Changing Financing of Higher Education

All four BRIC economies used to provide free public higher education to almost everyone who reached that level.

That financing model implicitly assumed high social externalities from investing in higher education and barriers to entry that would cause underinvestment without high public subsidies.

Today, however, all four countries have, in one way or another, either implemented cost share financing (tuition fees) in public universities, or allowed higher education to become “privatized.”

This has important implications for efficiency and equity in the higher education system.

All four BRIC economies used to provide free public higher education to almost everyone who reached that level.

That financing model implicitly assumed high social externalities from investing in higher education and barriers to entry that would cause underinvestment without high public subsidies.

Today, however, all four countries have, in one way or another, either implemented cost share financing (tuition fees) in public universities, or allowed higher education to become “privatized.”

This has important implications for efficiency and equity in the higher education system.

Changes in Financing Chinese Higher Education

Changes in Financing Chinese Higher Education

Figure 2. China: Revenue Structure of Regular Chinese Universities, by Category, 1990-2002 (percent)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1990 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l R

eve

nu

e

Government Budgetary Funds

Education Tax

Industry Affiliated with HigherEducation InstitutionsTuition and Fees

Contracts

Donations

Other

Figure 2. China: Revenue Structure of Regular Chinese Universities, by Category, 1990-2002 (percent)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1990 1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l R

eve

nu

e

Government Budgetary Funds

Education Tax

Industry Affiliated with HigherEducation InstitutionsTuition and Fees

Contracts

Donations

Other

Changes in Financing Indian Education

Changes in Financing Indian Education

Proportion of total central government budget going to higher education declined from 15% in 1980s to 10% in 1990s.

In addition, government pushed through affirmative action for scheduled castes and other lower status Indians, so that more than 50% of places in public universities are reserved for these groups.

Thus, costs per student have gone up, but central government funding role has gone down, increasing financial pressure on the states to pick up the slack.

Proportion of total central government budget going to higher education declined from 15% in 1980s to 10% in 1990s.

In addition, government pushed through affirmative action for scheduled castes and other lower status Indians, so that more than 50% of places in public universities are reserved for these groups.

Thus, costs per student have gone up, but central government funding role has gone down, increasing financial pressure on the states to pick up the slack.

Increased Privatization in IndiaIncreased Privatization in India

Flight of middle class to private institutions. Decline in government share of educational

expenditures from 80% in 1983 to 67% in 1999. Students enroll in public colleges but pay for

private IT courses. Also, professional education, namely

engineering (86% of seats in 2003), business (90 % private), and medicine (41 % private) has been marked by a major increase in private providers.

Flight of middle class to private institutions. Decline in government share of educational

expenditures from 80% in 1983 to 67% in 1999. Students enroll in public colleges but pay for

private IT courses. Also, professional education, namely

engineering (86% of seats in 2003), business (90 % private), and medicine (41 % private) has been marked by a major increase in private providers.

Quality of Higher Education

Quality of Higher Education

One way to measure quality is the cost per student and how it is changing over time. China and India appear to have increased public spending per pupil in recent years. But more “costly” students are increasingly entering universities, so quality may have fallen if the spending increases were not sufficient to cover increased costs.

Quality varies greatly among institutions. What is quality level in top 10-20 percent of HE institutions? What about bottom fourth?

Important to know quality at the bottom because a high fraction of professionals get their training at such institutions.

Do we think that the financing changes taking place in each country are improving or decreasing quality?

What changes are taking place in top institutions that might or might not be improving the quality of those instituions?

One way to measure quality is the cost per student and how it is changing over time. China and India appear to have increased public spending per pupil in recent years. But more “costly” students are increasingly entering universities, so quality may have fallen if the spending increases were not sufficient to cover increased costs.

Quality varies greatly among institutions. What is quality level in top 10-20 percent of HE institutions? What about bottom fourth?

Important to know quality at the bottom because a high fraction of professionals get their training at such institutions.

Do we think that the financing changes taking place in each country are improving or decreasing quality?

What changes are taking place in top institutions that might or might not be improving the quality of those instituions?