:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:經濟學實證研究三篇: 勞動、教育與所得不平等
作者:李維倫
作者(外文):Lee, Wei-lun
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:經濟學研究所
指導教授:古慧雯
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2018
主題關鍵詞:攤販人力資本多元入學高中畢業學校學業成績國民所得所得分配
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:5
  本論文包含三篇經濟學實證研究, 分別研究勞動、教育與所得不平等三個主題。
  第 1 章「教育投資、人力資本與勞動報酬: 為什麼高學歷攤販的利潤比較高?」藉由分析2013 年攤販經營概況調查資料, 使用攤販業主18 歲時大學入學考試的錄取率、業主18 歲時高中職升學人數和當年18 歲人口數的比率, 以及是否受到1968 年義務教育由6 年延長至9 年的影響等作為工具變數, 估計教育對攤販利潤的影響。我們發現, 攤販業主透過教育累積人力資本, 進而有助於提升其經營利潤, 這樣的因果關係受到實證結果的支持。
  第 2 章「入學管道與學習表現」使用2007–14 年間入學之台大學生的學籍資料、入學考試成績和在學成績, 探討不同管道學生入學後的學業表現差異, 並藉此評估多元入學政策在台大實施的成效。我們發現, 以個人申請管道入學學生的學業成績雖然顯著優於透過指考入學的學生, 但學測成績的差異即可解釋兩者入學後學業表現的大部分差異; 控制學測成績後, 申請生和指考生的學業成績並沒有顯著差異。在繁星計畫/ 繁星推薦方面, 繁星生平均的學業表現優於申請生和指考生。這不只是來自明星高中繁星生的貢獻, 非明星高中繁星生的學業表現平均而言也顯著高於指考生。然而如果只看來自2011–15 年內無人以申請或指考進入台大的高中的繁星生, 其學業成績則顯著低於指考生。此一差異也可以用學測成績的差異來解釋; 控制學測成績後, 這些繁星生和指考生的學業成績並沒有顯著差異。
  第 3 章「以國民所得會計的觀點探討台灣的所得分配」利用台灣財政部的稅務資料, 仿效Piketty, Saez, and Zucman (2018) 的方法將國民所得帳分配給每個個人, 建立國民所得的個體資料, 藉此分析台灣的所得分配、計算所得不均衡量指標、估計經濟成長果實的分配, 以及評估政府重分配政策對各所得級距組的影響。我們發現2001–2015 年間, 最高所得分額增長迅速, 經濟成長果實的分配極度不均, 政府所得重分配所涵蓋的範圍縮小, 而且所得重分配政策對降低所得不均程度的影響有限。台灣所得不均程度可能遠比官方統計所呈現的嚴重。
This dissertation consists of three essays on empirical economics research. The first chapter, “Education Investment, Human Capital and Earnings: Evidence from Street Vendors in Taiwan,” utilizes Street Vendors Survey from National Statistics, Taiwan to investigate the effect of human capital on vendor’s earnings. The 1968 compulsory education reform and the expansion of higher education are used as instrument variables and the two-stage least squares estimation indicates that human capital accumulated via educational investment significantly enhances to vendors’ profitability.
The second chapter, “Multi-channel Admission and Academic Achievement,” examines academic performance of students from different recruiting channels. At the turn of this century, National Taiwan University (NTU) started to admit undergraduate students via different channels. Top rankded students at high school are considered by the Star Program. Students interested in the Application Program are first screened by their GSAT (General Scholastic Ability Test) scores, and those who pass this screening will be further evaluated by the departments. Students not admitted by these two programs take a national joint entrance examination (Exam) and will be matched with departments of various universities based on their scores. This study compares college performance of students who enter NTU via different channels. We find that students admitted by the Application Program perform better than those admitted by the Exam Program. However, this performance difference could be explained away by the difference of their GSAT scores. Star students, on average, perform better than other students. Once we focus on high schools that have no graduates entering NTU via Application or Exam Program, we find their Star students have lower college scores than other students. These Star students, usually from backward places, though lagging behind their classmates in GSAT scores, exhibit good upward mobility in their class ranks.
The third chapter, “Distributional National Income Account of Taiwan,” constructs new data to provide a comprehensive view of income inequality issues in Taiwan. Following the method in Piketty, Saez, and Zucman (2018),
we distribute National Income into every individualistic adult in Taiwan and use this new individual income data to (1) estimate the income distribution of the whole population and provide updated inequality measures, (2) estimate the distribution of economic growth, and (3) evaluate the effects of government’s redistribution policy in alleviating inequality. We find that Taiwan
has an extremely high level of income inequality, an extremely unequal distribution of economic growth, and government redistribution policy has modest effects in improving inequality. Furthermore, from 2001 to 2015, top
income shares increased rapidly, while the social safety net became thinner. All official statistics seriously underreport these issues.
田芳華與傅祖壇(2009), “大學多元入學制度: 學生家庭社經背景與學業成就之比較,” 《教育科學研究期刊》, 54, 209–233。(Tian, Fang-Hua and Fu, Tsu-Tan(2009), “Multi-Channel College Entrance System: Relationship between Family Background, Academic Achievement and Entrance Channels,” Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 54, 209-233.)

吳慧瑛(2003), “二十年來教育發展之經濟評估, 1978–2001,” 《臺灣經濟預測與政策》, 33(2), 97–130。(Wu, Huo-Ying (2003), “Returns to Schooling in Taiwan, 1978-2001,” Taiwan Economic Forecast and Policy, 33, 97-130.)

吳豐山, 楊美鈴, 與余騰芳(2010), 《攤販輔導管理問題專案調查研究報告》, 監察院專案研究報告。

李浩仲, 李文傑, 與連賢明(2016a), “多「錢」入學? 從政大學生組成看多元入學,” 《經濟論文》, 44, 207–250。(Li, Hao-Chung, Li, Wen-Chieh, and Lien, Hsien-Ming (2016), “Investigating the Equality of Twotrack College Recruitment: Evidence from Administrative Data of National Chengchi University,” Academia Economic Papers, 44, 207-250.)

李浩仲, 李文傑, 與連賢明(2016b), “哪類孩子最受教? 從政大校務資料看學生表現,” 台灣經濟學會2016 年年會, 台灣經濟學會。(Li, Hao-Chung, Li, Wen-Chieh, and Lien, Hsien-Ming (2016), “Who Is More Likely to Shine? Academic and Nonacademic
Evidence From Students at National Chengchi University,” in 2016 Taiwan Economic Association Annual Conference, Taiwan Economic Association.)

林俞汝(2012), “大學多元入學方與大學學習成效,” 碩士論文, 國立暨南國際大學。(Lin, Yu-Ju (2012), “Multiple Entrance Program and Students’ Learning Outcome in College,” Master’s thesis, Graduate Institute of Economics, National Chi Nan University.)

秦夢群(2004), “大學多元入學制度實施與改革之研究,” 《教育政策論壇》, 7, 59–84。(Chin, Joseph M. (2004), “Better or Worse: Examining the Feasibility of the College Multiple Entrance Program,” Educational Policy Forum, 7, 59-84.)

莊奕琦與賴偉文(2007), “台灣教育報酬率估計: 工具變數法之應用,” 第十一屆經濟發展學術研討會, 國立台北大學。

陳婉琪, 陳承佑, 與林明仁(2016), “多元入學與選材機制: 臺北大學學生表現之校務資料分析,” 台灣經濟學會2016 年年會, 台灣經濟學會。(Chen, Wan-Chi, Chen, Cheng-Yu, and Lin, Ming-Jen(2016), “Multiple Entrance Program and Student Recruitment: An Analysis of Student Performance Using Administrative Data of National Taipei University,” in 2016 Taiwan Economic Association Annual Conference, Taiwan Economic Association.)

陳增達(2010), “台灣教育報酬率估計–以九年國教為工具變數之應用,” 碩士論文, 國立高雄大學。(Chen, Zeng-Da (2012), “Estimating Returns to Schooling in Taiwan: Using Instrument Variable Based on Nine-Year Education Program,” Master’s thesis, Department of Applied Economics, National University of Kaohsiung.)

陶宏麟, 吳幸蓁, 與陳碧綉(2017), “大學入學管道與學業表現–以東吳大學為例,” 世新經濟2017 年學術研討會, 世新大學經濟學系。(Tao, Hung-Lin, Wu, Shing-Jen, Chen, Bih-Show (2016), “Admission Channels in Matriculation and Academic Performances: A Case Study of Soochow University,”
in 2017 Shih Hsin Economics Conference, Department of Economics, Shih Hsin University.)

蔡彣涓(2017), “高等教育配對機制的效率性: 一個特色大學的招生與學生續讀率的研究,” 世新大學經濟學系。(Tsai, Wehn-Jyuan (2017), “Match Efficiency in Higher Education: Learning from a Distinctive University’s Recruit-ment and Retention,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, Shih
Hsin University)

駱明慶(2002), “誰是台大學生? 性別、省籍和城鄉差異,” 《經濟論文叢刊》, 30, 113–147。(Luoh, Ming-Ching (2002), “Who are NTU Students?–Differences across Ethnic and Gender Groups and Urban/Rural Discrepancy,” Taiwan Economic Review, 30, 113-147.)

駱明慶(2004), “升學機會與家庭背景,” 《經濟論文叢刊》, 32, 417–445。(Luoh, Ming-Ching (2004), “Educational Opportunities and Family Background in Taiwan,” Taiwan Economic Review, 32, 417-445.)

駱明慶(2016), “誰是台大學生? (2001-2014) – 多元入學的影響,” 《經濟論文叢刊》, 46, 47–95。(Luoh, Ming-Ching (2016), “Who are NTU Students?(2001–2014) the Effets of the Multi-Channel Admission Program,” Taiwan Economic Review, 46, 47-95.)

謝奕弘(2015), “大學多元入學制度對大學生表現影響之探討: 以國立清華大學為例,”碩士論文,國立清華大學。(Hsieh, Yi-Hung (2015), “Academic/Nonacademic Performance of Undergraduate Students: Does Multi-Admission Program Make a Difference?” Master’s thesis, Department of Economics,
National Tsing Hua University.)

Alvaredo, Facundo, AB Atkinson, Lucas Chancel, Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman (2016), “Distributional National Accounts (DINA) Guidelines: Concepts and Methods used in WID. world,” WID. world Working Paper, 2.

Angrist, Joshua D. and Alan B. Krueger (1991), “Does Compulsory Schooling Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 979–1014.

Garbinti, Bertrand, Jonathan Goupille-Lebret, and Thomas Piketty (2018), “Income inequality in France, 1900–2014: Evidence from Distributional National Accounts (DINA),” Journal of Public Economics.

Moretti, Enrico (2004), “Estimating the Social Return to Higher Education: Evidence From Longitudinal and Repeated Cross-Sectional Data,” Journal of Econometrics, 121(1-2), 175–212.

Piketty, Thomas (2003), “Income inequality in France, 1901–1998,” Journal of Political Economy, 111, 1004–1042.

Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman (2018), “Distributional National Accounts: Methods and Estimates for the United States,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133, 553–609.

Piketty, Thomas, Li Yang, and Gabriel Zucman (2017), Capital Accumulation, Private Property and Rising Inequality in China, 1978-2015, Report, National Bureau of Economic Research.

Smith, P. A. and M. R. Metzger (1998), “The Return to Education: Street Vendors in Mexico,” World Development, 20, 289–296.

Tsai, Wehn-Jyuan, Shin-Yi Chou, JinTan Liu, and Robert Thornton (2009), “Does Educational Expansion Encourage Female Workforce Participation? A Study of the 1968 Reform in Taiwan,” Economics of Education Review, 28, 750–758.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE