中国高校扩招背景下大学生就业和工资调整研究
|
摘要
在人力资本和内生经济增长理论的影响下,许多国家曾在不同的历史时期经历过高校扩招。中国自1999年开始扩大高等教育招生,至今十年有余。为了得到关于中国大学生就业与相对工资现状的正确认知,厘清有关大学生就业难问题的认识误区,文章首先做的工作就是对中国大学生就业和工资调整现状进行客观深入地考察,在此基础上试图从根本上找到现有市场结果的成因,对大学就业市场的现状给予客观的经济解释和评价,进而探讨现有市场结果有无改进的可能并有针对性地提出政策建议。
文章首先运用供求原理对高校扩招后可能发生的相对工资和就业调整结果进行分析。重点考察了大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力相对供给、相对需求和相对工资三个变量。分析结果表明高校扩招后就业和工资调整可能由于市场类型不同和相对需求变动而呈现出不同结果: 1.如果市场富有弹性,相对需求变动幅度小于相对供给,那么在现实经济中就会观测到相对工资降低并且就业增加。2.如果市场富有弹性,相对需求变动幅度大于相对供给,那么在现实经济中就会观测到相对工资上升并且就业增加。3.如果市场缺乏弹性,那么相对需求与相对供给之间的相对变动幅度将主要影响就业,现实经济中应该会观测到工资基本保持不变。
文章接下来对中国目前大学生工资和就业调整的现状进行检验。首先通过检验中国教育收益率来考察大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力的相对工资。检验结果表明:与扩招前相比,中国的高等教育收益率一直在持续下降。在高校扩招毕业生进入劳动力市场前的2000年相同条件下每多接受一年的正规教育可使收入提高8.9%。到了2004年,每多接受一年正规教育,收入只能增加5.6%,而到了2006年,这一比率继续下降至5%。这一检验结果表明,扩招以后大学生劳动力收入的增长速度远不及非大学生劳动力收入的增长速度,大学生劳动力与非大学劳动力的相对工资一直在持续下降。接下来文章运用经济计量的方法对大学生就业概率进行的检验表明,条件基本相同的大学毕业生,其就业概率在扩招后的低点迅速回升。表明大学生就业在扩招之后确实曾经迅速下降,之后随着相对工资不断下降,就业又开始迅速回升。最后,将两项检验结果——相对工资降低和就业概率先下降后上升——与前面的供求分析相结合发现中国劳动力市场实际上是富有弹性的劳动力市场,高校扩招后大学生劳动力相对需求的增加一直滞后于相对供给的增加。
文章在检验结果的基础上对大学生工资和就业调整结果加以解释。考察美国高校扩招的案例并与中国的情况加以比较发现:同样经历了高校扩招的两个大经济体的市场反应即相同又不同。相同的是,美国在40年代中期开始进行高等教育扩招,起初美国大学生劳动力市场呈现出了和中国大学生劳动力市场相同的趋势,教育收益率不断下降,相对需求增加缓慢。所不同的是,自80年代以来,美国的高校扩招仍在继续,甚至有加速的趋势,但教育收益率不再下降,反而快速稳定地持续上升,表明相对需求随着大学生劳动力相对供给的增加也在快速增加。那么中国大学生的相对工资是否也会遵循这样一条先下降后上升的变化路径呢?若要回答这一问题,最为关键的是要考察大学生相对需求为什么会增加。文章借用内生技术进步模型进行分析发现,相对需求的增加源于技术进步类型发生的变化,而技术进步路径变化主要源自高校扩招所导致的人口质量改变。模型的逻辑表述如下:大学生劳动力相对供给的突然增加,首先导致大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力之间相对工资下降,降低大学生劳动力的相对使用成本,从而自发地增加了产品生产企业对于大学生劳动力的相对需求和使用。市场上大学生劳动力使用数量的增加扩大了与大学生劳动力互补(具有技能偏态性)的技术进步的市场需求。与大学生劳动力互补的技术进步市场需求的扩大增加了技术研发企业对于技能偏态性技术进步的研发激励,最终使得技术进步向与大学生劳动力互补的路径发展。最后,随着偏向与大学生劳动力互补的技术进步类型逐渐被企业接受和应用,产品生产企业对于大学生劳动力的相对需求也相应增加,促使大学生劳动力相对需求曲线发生右移,使得均衡的相对工资回升。
这一内生技术进步模型从技术进步的角度解释了大学生劳动力相对需求增加的原因,提供了一个良好的理论参照。但是模型对于相对需求增加的解释并不全面。首先,模型结论——高校扩招必然会带来技术路径改变,从而自发地推动相对需求增加,其成立有着严格的有关相对供给和相对需求形成的假设前提,这些假设前提不可能完全与中国的经济现实相吻合。其次,模型只解释了技术进步对大学生劳动力相对需求的影响,并未将其他影响大学生劳动力相对需求的重要变量纳入研究视野。再次,模型将技术进步简单地归结为大学生劳动力供给增加扩大技术应用的市场,并没有对决定技术进步发生的其他原因纳入模型分析。最后,模型只解释了相对需求对于相对工资调整结果的影响,但是中国大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整还有来自供给方面的重要原因。
在部分借鉴模型解释的基础上,文章针对影响中国大学生劳动力就业和相对工资调整结果的主要因素进行了论述。从供给来看,在现有中国高等教育管理体制下,大学生劳动力供给主要表现为量的扩张,呈现出同质化的增长趋势,使得供给无法有效地与需求相适应,从而引起结构性失业。从需求来看,大学生劳动力相对需求作为一种引致需求与产业结构升级直接相关。内生技术进步模型从技术进步的角度解释了产业结构升级对大学生劳动力相对需求的影响。其逻辑结论成立的关键是人力资本的积累能够顺利引发技能偏态性的技术进步,从而推动产业结构升级和大学生劳动力相对需求的增加。而中国现有的科研管理体制不利于激励面向市场的有效率的技术创新,从而有可能导致从人力资本形成到技能偏态性技术进步形成之间的逻辑链条断裂。此外,除技术进步外,决定大学生劳动力相对需求的产业结构升级还与中国目前的消费结构密切相关,而消费结构又从根本上取决于我国现有的收入分配现状。因此影响我国收入分配结构的二元经济、行政垄断和土地管理制度等因素也是制约我国产业结构升级和大学生劳动力有效相对需求增加的根本原因。
最后,文章针对上述问题的成因提出改善我国大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整结果的对策。由于需求增长相对缓慢,新增加的供给主要依靠市场上相对工资不断下降来加以吸收,我国这种大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整结果不仅难以持续而且有可能产生因教致贫并加重贫困的代际转移。为改善目前的调整结果,文章认为应从供给和需求两方面入手针对成因提出解决办法。从长期来看,需求增长是解决大学生就业难问题的根本出路。为此,建议应通过完善产权保护制度,创新融资体制,改善企业创新环境来为企业的公平竞争营造健康的宏观环境,提供广泛有效的创业教育和充分的创新激励,促进技术进步根据市场相对需求自发产生,形成大学生劳动力的有效需求。除此之外,还应从根本上解决二元经济、行政垄断和土地管理制度方面的问题,使得收入分配更加公平,从而实现消费结和产业结构升级带动下的大学生相对需求增加。然而,毕竟需求的扩张是个缓慢而渐进的过程,美国从上世纪40年代扩招到80年代需求实现快速增长经历30多年的时间。因此,目前我国面临的更为急迫的任务是从供给入手解决大学生劳动力结构性过剩问题,改革现有的高等教育管理体制,建立社会评价体系,打破原有盲目升格扩张的怪圈,以实现针对市场的多样化办学和多样化专业设置,为经济发展提供满足市场需求的大学生劳动力。
文章通过对我国大学生劳动力市场的考察和分析得出的结论是:1.高校扩招并不必然会导致大学生失业率上升,和相对工资下降。2.中国的大学生就业之难并非难在找不到工作,而是在于找不到更高收入的工作。3.若要根本上有效解决我国大学生劳动力结构性过剩问题和提高大学生的相对工资,从短期看,要进行高等管理教育体制改革,以面向市场需求实现大学生劳动力差异化供给;从长期看要从更为根本的产权、融资和消除二元经济及地区差异的制度入手,促进人力资本积累引发的技术进步顺利发生,产业结构顺利升级,进而形成大学生劳动力的有效需求。
Under the influence of convincing conclusions achieved by the human capital theory and the endogenous economic growth theory,many countries come to expand the higher education output in the different historical time. It has been more than ten years since the higher education begins in China in1999. In order to achieve a proper knowledge on China’s graduate employment and clarify the misunderstanding to the graduate employment problems,it is initial and primary to examine the present state of China’s graduate labor market objectively,scientifically,deeply and correctly. Without the base of the objective examination results,it is impossible to find fundamental cause of the present market result,to deeply discuss the likeliness of improving the present result,and to propose constructive and catering strategies and suggestions.
The article begins with analysis based on simply supply and demand principles,concludes that increase of the relative supply caused by higher education expansion may lead to different market result. Suppose demand to be unchanged: 1. If the market is completely flexible,supply increase,ceteris paribus,leads to an increased employment and decreased wage at the equilibrium; 2. If the market is completely inelastic with typical unbalanced characteristics,supply increase,ceteris paribus,leads to an increase of graduates unemployment. Suppose demand to be changed: 1. if the market is completely flexible,supply increase,ceteris paribus,still leads to an increased employment,but the result of comparing the Ex-ante and Ex-post equilibrium wage is uncertain. Whether the Ex-post equilibrium is higher than the Ex-ante is uncertain,decided by the degree of the change of demand relative to supply,but it is certain that the Ex-post equilibrium wage resuming a changed demand must be higher than that with an unchanged demand assumption. 2. If the market is completely inelastic with typical unbalanced characteristics,there exist three possible market results: supply is still surplus over demand; supply is equal to demand; supply is deficient to demand.
In order to examine the conclusion drawn by the above theoretical analysis,the article employs the econometric methodology to examine the return to education in China and graduate employment probability respectively. The econometric result shows: compared with the pre-expansion,China’s return to education keeps decreasing,but employment probability rebounds high and fast from the low level immediate after expansion. The very econometric result is in very accord to the first case of supply and demand analysis,which assumes demand as to be unchanged and the market as to be completely flexible. According to market supply and demand analysis,if the demand is unchanged and the market is flexible,increased supply will increase the equilibrium employment and decrease the equilibrium wage under the condition of ceteris paribus. The counterpart econometric proof is that the employment probability increases after a sudden decline and the return to education keeps a tendency of falling.
After investigating the case of American graduate labor market adjusted to the higher education expansion and comparing it with China’s case,it is found that the two markets react the same way in the first period,but differently in the second period when higher education is expanding. In the initial three or four decades of expansion,the graduate labor market in America shows tendency of declining return to education same to the present China’s graduate labor market. However,in the recent 30 years,although the higher education continually expands even at an accelerated pace in America,the return to the education stops falling and rebounds up steadily and fast. In the first period,American market reacts in the way explained in the first case of the above supply and demand analysis which assumes the demand to be unchanged and the market to be flexible. In the second period,American market reacts in the way explained in the case of the above supply and demand analysis which assumes the demand to be changed and the market to be flexible. It shows that increased demand is the root cause of different market results. The question is,why the demand increases in American market? Is the increased demand endogenous and exogenous?
In order to answer the question above,the article,based on the analysis with Acemoglu model,concludes: the sudden increase in the relative supply of graduate labors first do leads to the decline in the relative wage between graduate labors and non-graduate labors. But the decline is not the final equilibrium result. The sudden increase in the relative supply of graduate labors will increase the demand of final goods firms with the decreased relative wage,further increases the demand of technology which is complement to graduate labors and called skill biased technology. The enlarged demand and market of skill biased technology improves the incentives of R&D activities on skill biased technology. As a result,the technology development on the BGP (balanced growth path) is directed to be complementary to graduate labors,which further increases the demand of graduate labors by goods production firms,makes the demand curve shift to the right side,and raises the equilibrium relative wage that may even be higher than the original point under certain circumstances.
This model offers a very convincing explanation to what happens in the American labor market. The following questions arise: how to explain what happens in China’s Labor market. May the falling relative wage of graduate labors be an inevitable temporary period on the course of adjustment to the final general equilibrium?
The answer is negative. The reason is that different constraint conditions result in different market equilibrium results. A principal conclusion drawn from the present constraint conditions in China’s economic development is the present state with low return to education is very likely to have already been the market equilibrium result. Without changing the present constraint conditions,the equilibrium will not be changed.
Obviously,the current market equilibrium is not optimistic result,for continuing accumulating human capital,instead of producing technological development and industrial structure upgrading,would rather be likely to create the education-caused poverty and make the problem of the poverty transmission through generations even more severely. Is it possible to change the unpleasant result?
According to the analysis to China’s present economic development,it is shown that if some institutional arrangements are changed,a better market equilibrium is very likely to be realized. These institutional arrangements include: hardening the budget constraints of higher education institutions through the reform to the property fiscal institutions and regulations in order to realize the diversified supply produced by higher education institutions; creating a healthy macro-environment for the enterprises under the hard budget constrain conditions to compete sound and fair,through perfecting property right protecting and financing institutions,providing adequate incentives for starting new business and innovation,promoting technological advance to be formed autonomously according to market demand,and finally constructing a benevolent circle including income growth and upgrading industrial structure in economic society.
To draw a conclusion,investigation and analysis on China’s graduate labor market show that: expanded higher education will not necessarily lead to difficult graduate employment; the difficulty of graduate employment does not lies in being unable to find a job,but lies in being unable to find a job with higher income; the starting point of a fundamental change to the market equilibrium result with low educational return is to form incentive of diversifying supply of graduate labors and arrange proper property right institutions to form efficient demand.
文章首先运用供求原理对高校扩招后可能发生的相对工资和就业调整结果进行分析。重点考察了大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力相对供给、相对需求和相对工资三个变量。分析结果表明高校扩招后就业和工资调整可能由于市场类型不同和相对需求变动而呈现出不同结果: 1.如果市场富有弹性,相对需求变动幅度小于相对供给,那么在现实经济中就会观测到相对工资降低并且就业增加。2.如果市场富有弹性,相对需求变动幅度大于相对供给,那么在现实经济中就会观测到相对工资上升并且就业增加。3.如果市场缺乏弹性,那么相对需求与相对供给之间的相对变动幅度将主要影响就业,现实经济中应该会观测到工资基本保持不变。
文章接下来对中国目前大学生工资和就业调整的现状进行检验。首先通过检验中国教育收益率来考察大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力的相对工资。检验结果表明:与扩招前相比,中国的高等教育收益率一直在持续下降。在高校扩招毕业生进入劳动力市场前的2000年相同条件下每多接受一年的正规教育可使收入提高8.9%。到了2004年,每多接受一年正规教育,收入只能增加5.6%,而到了2006年,这一比率继续下降至5%。这一检验结果表明,扩招以后大学生劳动力收入的增长速度远不及非大学生劳动力收入的增长速度,大学生劳动力与非大学劳动力的相对工资一直在持续下降。接下来文章运用经济计量的方法对大学生就业概率进行的检验表明,条件基本相同的大学毕业生,其就业概率在扩招后的低点迅速回升。表明大学生就业在扩招之后确实曾经迅速下降,之后随着相对工资不断下降,就业又开始迅速回升。最后,将两项检验结果——相对工资降低和就业概率先下降后上升——与前面的供求分析相结合发现中国劳动力市场实际上是富有弹性的劳动力市场,高校扩招后大学生劳动力相对需求的增加一直滞后于相对供给的增加。
文章在检验结果的基础上对大学生工资和就业调整结果加以解释。考察美国高校扩招的案例并与中国的情况加以比较发现:同样经历了高校扩招的两个大经济体的市场反应即相同又不同。相同的是,美国在40年代中期开始进行高等教育扩招,起初美国大学生劳动力市场呈现出了和中国大学生劳动力市场相同的趋势,教育收益率不断下降,相对需求增加缓慢。所不同的是,自80年代以来,美国的高校扩招仍在继续,甚至有加速的趋势,但教育收益率不再下降,反而快速稳定地持续上升,表明相对需求随着大学生劳动力相对供给的增加也在快速增加。那么中国大学生的相对工资是否也会遵循这样一条先下降后上升的变化路径呢?若要回答这一问题,最为关键的是要考察大学生相对需求为什么会增加。文章借用内生技术进步模型进行分析发现,相对需求的增加源于技术进步类型发生的变化,而技术进步路径变化主要源自高校扩招所导致的人口质量改变。模型的逻辑表述如下:大学生劳动力相对供给的突然增加,首先导致大学生劳动力与非大学生劳动力之间相对工资下降,降低大学生劳动力的相对使用成本,从而自发地增加了产品生产企业对于大学生劳动力的相对需求和使用。市场上大学生劳动力使用数量的增加扩大了与大学生劳动力互补(具有技能偏态性)的技术进步的市场需求。与大学生劳动力互补的技术进步市场需求的扩大增加了技术研发企业对于技能偏态性技术进步的研发激励,最终使得技术进步向与大学生劳动力互补的路径发展。最后,随着偏向与大学生劳动力互补的技术进步类型逐渐被企业接受和应用,产品生产企业对于大学生劳动力的相对需求也相应增加,促使大学生劳动力相对需求曲线发生右移,使得均衡的相对工资回升。
这一内生技术进步模型从技术进步的角度解释了大学生劳动力相对需求增加的原因,提供了一个良好的理论参照。但是模型对于相对需求增加的解释并不全面。首先,模型结论——高校扩招必然会带来技术路径改变,从而自发地推动相对需求增加,其成立有着严格的有关相对供给和相对需求形成的假设前提,这些假设前提不可能完全与中国的经济现实相吻合。其次,模型只解释了技术进步对大学生劳动力相对需求的影响,并未将其他影响大学生劳动力相对需求的重要变量纳入研究视野。再次,模型将技术进步简单地归结为大学生劳动力供给增加扩大技术应用的市场,并没有对决定技术进步发生的其他原因纳入模型分析。最后,模型只解释了相对需求对于相对工资调整结果的影响,但是中国大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整还有来自供给方面的重要原因。
在部分借鉴模型解释的基础上,文章针对影响中国大学生劳动力就业和相对工资调整结果的主要因素进行了论述。从供给来看,在现有中国高等教育管理体制下,大学生劳动力供给主要表现为量的扩张,呈现出同质化的增长趋势,使得供给无法有效地与需求相适应,从而引起结构性失业。从需求来看,大学生劳动力相对需求作为一种引致需求与产业结构升级直接相关。内生技术进步模型从技术进步的角度解释了产业结构升级对大学生劳动力相对需求的影响。其逻辑结论成立的关键是人力资本的积累能够顺利引发技能偏态性的技术进步,从而推动产业结构升级和大学生劳动力相对需求的增加。而中国现有的科研管理体制不利于激励面向市场的有效率的技术创新,从而有可能导致从人力资本形成到技能偏态性技术进步形成之间的逻辑链条断裂。此外,除技术进步外,决定大学生劳动力相对需求的产业结构升级还与中国目前的消费结构密切相关,而消费结构又从根本上取决于我国现有的收入分配现状。因此影响我国收入分配结构的二元经济、行政垄断和土地管理制度等因素也是制约我国产业结构升级和大学生劳动力有效相对需求增加的根本原因。
最后,文章针对上述问题的成因提出改善我国大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整结果的对策。由于需求增长相对缓慢,新增加的供给主要依靠市场上相对工资不断下降来加以吸收,我国这种大学生劳动力相对工资和就业调整结果不仅难以持续而且有可能产生因教致贫并加重贫困的代际转移。为改善目前的调整结果,文章认为应从供给和需求两方面入手针对成因提出解决办法。从长期来看,需求增长是解决大学生就业难问题的根本出路。为此,建议应通过完善产权保护制度,创新融资体制,改善企业创新环境来为企业的公平竞争营造健康的宏观环境,提供广泛有效的创业教育和充分的创新激励,促进技术进步根据市场相对需求自发产生,形成大学生劳动力的有效需求。除此之外,还应从根本上解决二元经济、行政垄断和土地管理制度方面的问题,使得收入分配更加公平,从而实现消费结和产业结构升级带动下的大学生相对需求增加。然而,毕竟需求的扩张是个缓慢而渐进的过程,美国从上世纪40年代扩招到80年代需求实现快速增长经历30多年的时间。因此,目前我国面临的更为急迫的任务是从供给入手解决大学生劳动力结构性过剩问题,改革现有的高等教育管理体制,建立社会评价体系,打破原有盲目升格扩张的怪圈,以实现针对市场的多样化办学和多样化专业设置,为经济发展提供满足市场需求的大学生劳动力。
文章通过对我国大学生劳动力市场的考察和分析得出的结论是:1.高校扩招并不必然会导致大学生失业率上升,和相对工资下降。2.中国的大学生就业之难并非难在找不到工作,而是在于找不到更高收入的工作。3.若要根本上有效解决我国大学生劳动力结构性过剩问题和提高大学生的相对工资,从短期看,要进行高等管理教育体制改革,以面向市场需求实现大学生劳动力差异化供给;从长期看要从更为根本的产权、融资和消除二元经济及地区差异的制度入手,促进人力资本积累引发的技术进步顺利发生,产业结构顺利升级,进而形成大学生劳动力的有效需求。
Under the influence of convincing conclusions achieved by the human capital theory and the endogenous economic growth theory,many countries come to expand the higher education output in the different historical time. It has been more than ten years since the higher education begins in China in1999. In order to achieve a proper knowledge on China’s graduate employment and clarify the misunderstanding to the graduate employment problems,it is initial and primary to examine the present state of China’s graduate labor market objectively,scientifically,deeply and correctly. Without the base of the objective examination results,it is impossible to find fundamental cause of the present market result,to deeply discuss the likeliness of improving the present result,and to propose constructive and catering strategies and suggestions.
The article begins with analysis based on simply supply and demand principles,concludes that increase of the relative supply caused by higher education expansion may lead to different market result. Suppose demand to be unchanged: 1. If the market is completely flexible,supply increase,ceteris paribus,leads to an increased employment and decreased wage at the equilibrium; 2. If the market is completely inelastic with typical unbalanced characteristics,supply increase,ceteris paribus,leads to an increase of graduates unemployment. Suppose demand to be changed: 1. if the market is completely flexible,supply increase,ceteris paribus,still leads to an increased employment,but the result of comparing the Ex-ante and Ex-post equilibrium wage is uncertain. Whether the Ex-post equilibrium is higher than the Ex-ante is uncertain,decided by the degree of the change of demand relative to supply,but it is certain that the Ex-post equilibrium wage resuming a changed demand must be higher than that with an unchanged demand assumption. 2. If the market is completely inelastic with typical unbalanced characteristics,there exist three possible market results: supply is still surplus over demand; supply is equal to demand; supply is deficient to demand.
In order to examine the conclusion drawn by the above theoretical analysis,the article employs the econometric methodology to examine the return to education in China and graduate employment probability respectively. The econometric result shows: compared with the pre-expansion,China’s return to education keeps decreasing,but employment probability rebounds high and fast from the low level immediate after expansion. The very econometric result is in very accord to the first case of supply and demand analysis,which assumes demand as to be unchanged and the market as to be completely flexible. According to market supply and demand analysis,if the demand is unchanged and the market is flexible,increased supply will increase the equilibrium employment and decrease the equilibrium wage under the condition of ceteris paribus. The counterpart econometric proof is that the employment probability increases after a sudden decline and the return to education keeps a tendency of falling.
After investigating the case of American graduate labor market adjusted to the higher education expansion and comparing it with China’s case,it is found that the two markets react the same way in the first period,but differently in the second period when higher education is expanding. In the initial three or four decades of expansion,the graduate labor market in America shows tendency of declining return to education same to the present China’s graduate labor market. However,in the recent 30 years,although the higher education continually expands even at an accelerated pace in America,the return to the education stops falling and rebounds up steadily and fast. In the first period,American market reacts in the way explained in the first case of the above supply and demand analysis which assumes the demand to be unchanged and the market to be flexible. In the second period,American market reacts in the way explained in the case of the above supply and demand analysis which assumes the demand to be changed and the market to be flexible. It shows that increased demand is the root cause of different market results. The question is,why the demand increases in American market? Is the increased demand endogenous and exogenous?
In order to answer the question above,the article,based on the analysis with Acemoglu model,concludes: the sudden increase in the relative supply of graduate labors first do leads to the decline in the relative wage between graduate labors and non-graduate labors. But the decline is not the final equilibrium result. The sudden increase in the relative supply of graduate labors will increase the demand of final goods firms with the decreased relative wage,further increases the demand of technology which is complement to graduate labors and called skill biased technology. The enlarged demand and market of skill biased technology improves the incentives of R&D activities on skill biased technology. As a result,the technology development on the BGP (balanced growth path) is directed to be complementary to graduate labors,which further increases the demand of graduate labors by goods production firms,makes the demand curve shift to the right side,and raises the equilibrium relative wage that may even be higher than the original point under certain circumstances.
This model offers a very convincing explanation to what happens in the American labor market. The following questions arise: how to explain what happens in China’s Labor market. May the falling relative wage of graduate labors be an inevitable temporary period on the course of adjustment to the final general equilibrium?
The answer is negative. The reason is that different constraint conditions result in different market equilibrium results. A principal conclusion drawn from the present constraint conditions in China’s economic development is the present state with low return to education is very likely to have already been the market equilibrium result. Without changing the present constraint conditions,the equilibrium will not be changed.
Obviously,the current market equilibrium is not optimistic result,for continuing accumulating human capital,instead of producing technological development and industrial structure upgrading,would rather be likely to create the education-caused poverty and make the problem of the poverty transmission through generations even more severely. Is it possible to change the unpleasant result?
According to the analysis to China’s present economic development,it is shown that if some institutional arrangements are changed,a better market equilibrium is very likely to be realized. These institutional arrangements include: hardening the budget constraints of higher education institutions through the reform to the property fiscal institutions and regulations in order to realize the diversified supply produced by higher education institutions; creating a healthy macro-environment for the enterprises under the hard budget constrain conditions to compete sound and fair,through perfecting property right protecting and financing institutions,providing adequate incentives for starting new business and innovation,promoting technological advance to be formed autonomously according to market demand,and finally constructing a benevolent circle including income growth and upgrading industrial structure in economic society.
To draw a conclusion,investigation and analysis on China’s graduate labor market show that: expanded higher education will not necessarily lead to difficult graduate employment; the difficulty of graduate employment does not lies in being unable to find a job,but lies in being unable to find a job with higher income; the starting point of a fundamental change to the market equilibrium result with low educational return is to form incentive of diversifying supply of graduate labors and arrange proper property right institutions to form efficient demand.
引文
[1] Abraham,K.,Katz,L. Cyclical unemployment: sectoral shifts or aggregate disturbances?[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1986(94)
[2] Acemoglu,D.Technical change,inequality,and the labor market.[J].Journal of Economic Literature,2002(3): 7-72
[3] Alba-Ramirez,A.Mismatch in the Spanish labor market?[J]. Journal of Human Resources,1993,28(2):259-278
[4] Allen,S. G.“Technology and the wage structure.”1976,NBER Working Paper No. 5534
[5] Autor,D. H. Katz,L. F.,Krueger,A.B. Computing inequality: have computers changed the labor market?[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics , 1998 ,113(4):1169-1213.
[6] Baldwin,R. E. Patterns of development in newly settled regions[J]. The Manchester School. 1956(104):161-179
[7] Battu,H. Belfield,C.R.,Sloane,P.J. Overeducation among graduates: a cohort view[J],Educaiton Economics,1999,7(1): 21-38
[8] Becker,Gary. Human capital:a theoretical and empirical analysis,with special reference to education[M]. Columbia University Press,1964
[9] Berg,I.,Freedman,M. Managers and work reform: a limited engagement. New York: Free Press,1978
[10] Berman,E. Bound,J.,Griliches,Z. Changes in the demand for skilled labor within U.S. manufacturing industries: evidence from the annual survey of manufacturing[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(2):367-397.
[11] Bils , Mark , Klenow , P.J.Does schooling cause growth[J]. AmericanEconomicReview,2000,90(5):1160-1183.
[12] Borghans,L. Educational choice and labour market information[D]. Limburg University,Maastricht,1993
[13] Borghans de Grip,L.,A.,Heijke,H. Labor market information and the choice of vocational specialization[J]. Economics of Education Review,1996,15(1): 59-74.
[14] Bound,J.,George J. Changes in the structure of wages in the 1980’s: an evaluation of alternative explanations[J]. American Economic Review .1992(82):371-92.
[15] Brecher,R.A.,Choudhri,E.U. The factor content of consumption in Canada and the United States: a two-country test of the Hechscher-Ohlin-Vanek model[A].Robert C.Feenstra. Empirical Mehtods for International Trade[C].Cambridge:MA:MIT Press,1988: 5-17
[16] Brennan,J. and McGeevor,P.A.Graduates at work: degree courses and the labour market[M],London: Jessica Kingsley,1988
[17] Breneman , D.W. Liberal arts colleges , thriving , surviving , or endangered?[M].Washington/D.C.:The Brookings Institution,1994
[18] Brown , C. , Campbell B. Technological change and wage structures in semiconductor companies. Center for Work,Technology,and Society Working Paper,University of California,Berkeley,1999
[19] Carnoy,M. International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education,second edition[M]. Oxford: Pergamon,1995
[20] Cheng,W.Sachs,J.,Yang,X.A general equilibrium re-appraisal of the Stolper-Samuelson theorem[J].Journal of Ecnomics,2000a(66):1-18
[21] Cheng,W.,Sachs,J.,Yang,X..An inframargian analysis of the Ricardian model[J].Review of International Economics,2000b(8)
[22] Cheng,W.,Sachs,J.,Yang,X.. An inframargian analysis of the Hechscher-Ohlin model with transaction costs and technological comparative advantage[J].Harvard Center for International Development Working Paper 1999,No.9
[23] Cheng.W.,Liu,M.,Yang,X.A Ricardo model with endogenous comparative advantage and endogenous comparative advantage and endogenous trade policy regime[J].Economic Record,2000(76)
[24] Daniels,P. Economic gains from technology-intensive trade: an empirical assessment[J]. Cambridge Journal o economics,1999(123):24-35
[25] Davis , S. , Haltiwanger , J. Wage dispersion between and within U.S. manufacturing plants: 1963-1986[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics. 1991:115-200
[26] Denison,E.F. Measurement of labor Input: some questions of definition and the adequacy of data[J]. Out put , Input , and Productivity Measurement ,1960:347-372
[27] Denison,E.F. Sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternative before us. Committee for Economic Development,1962
[28] Denison,E.F. Why growth rates differ[J]. The Brookings Instition,1967
[29] Denison,E.F. Trends in American economic growth,1929-1982.The Brookings Institution,1985
[30] DiNardo,J.,Pischke,J.S. The returns to computer use revisited: have pencils changed the wage structure too ? [J] Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997(112): 291-303.
[31] Doms,M.Timothy,D.,Troske,K. Workers,wages,and technology[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997(112):253-290.
[32] Drucker,P.F. Innovation and entrepreneurship[M]. New York:Harper,Row.1985
[33] Duncan,G. J.,Hoffman,S. D. The incidence and wage effects of overeducation[J]. Economics of Education Review 1981,1(Winter):75-86
[34] Fisher,I.The theory of interest,The Macmillan company. 1930
[35] Freeman,R.The overeducated American,New York: Academic Press,1976.
[36] [36]Gancia,,Zilibotti,F. Technological change and the wealth of nations Gino[J].Annual Review of Economics,2009,1(April): 93-120
[37] Groot , W. , Maassen van den Brink , H. Allocation and the returns to overeducation in the United Kingdom[J].Education Economics. 1997(5):169-183
[38] Harbison , Ralph W. Colombia[A]. Lewis , W. A. Tropical development 1880-1913[C]. Evanston: Northwestern University Press,1970:64-99
[39] Hartog,J. Allocation and the earnings function. Empirical Economics,1986,11(2):97-110.
[40] Freeman,R. The facts about the declining economic value of college[J]. Human Resources,1976(15): 124-142
[41] Gadrey,J.Catrice,J.,Ribault,T. Levels and systems of employment implications of skill-biased technological change: international evidence[J]. Oxford Economic Papers,2001(153):21-30
[42] Golladay,M. The condition of education[M]. Washington,DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,1976 Edition.
[43] Gorman , G. Hanlon , D. , King , W. Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education,enterprise education,and education for small business management:A ten-year literature review [J]. International Small Business Journal,1997(15):56-77
[44] Greenwood,J. Mehmet,Y. 1974[Z].Carnegie-Rochester Conference. Series. Public 1997(46),pp. 49–95.
[45] Greene,W. Fixed effects and bias due to the incidental parameters problem in the Tobit Model[J]. Econometric Reviews,2004(23): 125-147.
[46] Gregeory,M.,Zissinos,B. Jobs for the skilled,new technology and demand change the structure of UK employment[A]. 1979-1990 Oxford Economic Papers 2001(153):42-50
[47] Grossman , G. , Helpman , E..Comparative advantage and long-run growth[J].American Economic Review,1999(80)
[48] Gunderson,M.,Krashinsky,H. Do education decisions respond to returns by field of study[A]. University of Toronto Canadian Labour Market and Skills Researcher Network Working Paper[M]. 2009,47(November)
[49] Habermalz,S. Job matching and the returns to educational signals[A]. IZA Discussion Paper[M]. 2003(726)
[50] Hartog,J.,Oosterbeek,H. Education,allocation and earnings in the Netherlands: over-schooling?[J] Economics of Education Review,1988,7( 2):185-194
[51] House,J. The effects of occupational stress on physical health[A]. O’Toole,J.In work and the quality of life[C],Cambridge:MA.MIT Press.1974:145-170.
[52] Johnson,B. F.,Mellor,J.W. The role of agriculture in economic development[J]. American Economic Review,1961(L1):566-93
[53] [53]Juhn,Ch. Kevin,M.,Pierce,B. Wage inequality and the rise in returns to skill[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1993(101):410-442.
[54] Karabel,J.,Halsey,A.H. Power and ideology in education[M]. Oxford University Press,New York. 1977
[55] Katz,L. F.,Murphy,K. Changes in relative wages,1963-1987: supply anddemand factors[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992(107): 36-78
[56] Kelly,R.,Lewis,P. E.T.The changing pattern of skill demand in the Australia economy[R] , Paper presented to the Third International Conference on Knowledge,Culture and Change in Organisations,Penang,10-14 August 2003 and The 32ND Conference of Economists 2003,Australian National University,29 September– 1 October 2003
[57] Kiker,B. F. Sntors,C.,Mendes De Oliverira,M. Overeducation and undereducation: evidence for Prtugal[J]. Economics of Education Review,1997,16(2): 111-125
[58] Kroch,E. A.,Sjoblom,K. Schooling as human capital or a signal: some evidence[J].The Journal of Human Resources,1994,29(1): 156-180.
[59] Krueger,A. How computers have changed the wage structure: evidence from micro-data 1984-1989[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993(108):33-60
[60] Krugman,P.R. Technology,trade and factor prices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2000(50): 774-881
[61] Levy,F.,Murnane,R. With what skills are computers a complement[A]. AEA Papers and Proceedings[C],1996: 258-262.
[62] Lewis,W. A. Report on the industrialization of the Gold Coast[M]. Accra: Government printing office of the Gold Coast,1953:
[63] Lucas,R.E.Jr. On the mechanics of economic development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economy,1988(22):2-42
[64] Machin,S. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,2001,Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,2002,63 (s1):753-776
[65] Maskus,K.E. A test of the Hechscher-Ohlin-Vanek theorem: the Leontief Commonplace[J].Journal of International Economics,1985(Nov.)
[66] Mankiw,G.,RomeR&D.,Weil,D.A contribution to the emirics of economic growth[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,107(2):407-437
[67] McGuinness,S. Graduate overeducation as a sheepskin effect: evidence from Northern Ireland[J]. Applied Economics,2003(35):597–608
[68] Miller,A. Occupations of the labor force according to the dictionary of occupational titles[A]. Mimeograghed. Philadelphia , PA: PennsylvaniaUniversity,Population Studies Center,1971
[69] Minhas,B.S.The honohypallagic production function,factor-intensity reversals,and the Hechscher-Ohlin theorem[J].Journal of Political Economy ,1962(Apr):138-156
[70] Murphy,K.M,Shleifler,A.,Vishny,R. Income distribution,market size,and industrialization[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1989 ,104(3):537-564
[71] North,D. C. Agriculture in regional ecohomic growth[J]. Journal of Farm Economics,1959(L1): 943-951
[72] Psacharopolos , G.Returns to education: an update international comparison[J].Comparative Education Review,1981,17(3): 321-341
[73] Psacharopolos,G.Returns to education: a further international update and implications[J].The Journal of Human Resources,1985,20(4):583-604
[74] Psacharopolos,G,Woodhall,M..Education for development:an analysis of investment choices[Z].Oxford University Press.1985
[75] Psacharopolos , G.Rates of return to investment in education around the world[J].Comparative Education,1972,16(1):54-67
[76] Psacharopolos,G.,Patrinos,H.A.Returns to investment in education: A further update[R].World Bank Policy Research Working Paper,No.2881
[77] [76]Psacharopoulos,G.,Economics of education: research and studies[M]. Oxford: Pergamon,1987
[78] Quinn,R. and Shepard,L. The 1972-73 quality of employment survey: descriptive statistics,with comparison data from 1969-70 survey of working conditions[A]. Ann Arbor. MI: University of Michigan,Survey Research Center. 1974
[79] Quinn,R and Mandlovitch,M. Education and job satisfaction: a questionable payoff[A]. Ann Arbor,MI: University of Michigan,Survey Research Center. 1975
[80] Ranis,G. Industrial development[A]. Galenson,W. Economic growth and structural change in Taiwan[C].Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press,1979
[81] Rumberger,R. Overeducaiton in the U.S. labor market. New York: Praeger. 1981
[82] Schomburg,H.,Teichler,U. Higher education and graduate employment in Europe: results from graduate surveys from twelve countries,Springer,Dordrecht,Netherlands,2006
[83] Seohgoon,K.,Dong-Pyo,H. Technological change and demand for skills in developing countries[J]. The Developing Economics 2002(6) : 559-618
[84] Sheppard,H.,Herrick,N. Where have all the robots gone? Worker dissatisfaction in the‘70s[M]. New York: Free Press,1972
[85] Sicherman,N.“Overeducaiton”in the labfor market[J]. Journal of Labor Economics,1991,9(2):101-122
[86] Sloane,P. J. Much ado About Nothing? What does the Overeducation Literature Really Tell us?[A].
[87] Felix Büchel,A. de Grip,Antje Mertens. Overeducation in Europe: Current Issues in Theory and policy[C]. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar,2003
[88] Staiger,R.W.Aspecification test o fthe Hechscher-Ohlin Theory[J].Journal of Political Economy,1993(Nov.)
[89] Spence,M. Job market signaling[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1973(87): 355-374
[90] Tamsin Bowers,B.,Lee Harvey,Are there too many graduates in the UK? A literature review and analysis of graduate employability[J],Industry and Higher Education,August 2004,243-254
[91] Taylor,J. R. Rural employment trends and the legacy of surplus labor: 1978-1989[A]. Economic Trends in Chinese Agriculture: The Impact of Post Mao Reforms[C]. New York: Oxford University Press,2003
[92] Teichler,U. Changing patterns of the higher education Ssystem,London: J. Kingsley,1988
[93] Teichler,U. Occupational structures and higher education[A]. Clark,B. R. and Neave,G. R.,eds.,The Encyclopedia of Higher Education[C]. Pergamon,Oxford,1992:975-992.
[94] Thurow,L. Generating Inequality: mechanisms of distribution in the U.S. economy[M]. NewYork: Basic Books,1975.
[95] Tian Qiu. Private returns to education: earnings,health and well-being [D],University of Bath,2007(9)
[96] Trefler,Daniel.International factor price differences: Leontief was right![J]. Journal of Politial Economy,December 1993,101(6)
[97] Tsang,Mun C.,Levin,Henry M. Economics of overeducation[J].Economics of Education Review. 1985,4(2): 93-104
[98] Wim Groot,,Maassen van den Brink,H. Allocation and the returns to overeducatio in the United Kingdom[J]. Education Economics. 1997(5): 169-183
[99] Yankelovich,D. The new morality: a profile of American Youth in the‘70s. New York: McGraw-Hill,1974
[100]蔡昉.劳动力无限供给时代结束[J].金融经济,2008(3)
[101]陈成文,谭日辉.人力资本与大学毕业生就业的关系——基于2003、2004届大学毕业生的实证研究[J].高等教育研究.2004(6)
[102]陈晓宇,陈良焜,夏晨.20世纪90年代中国城镇教育收益率的变化与启示[J].北京大学教育评论,2003(04)
[103]陈晓宇,闵维方.我国高等教育个人收益率研究[J].高等教育研究,1998(11)
[104]陈志武.我们的政府有多大[N].经济观察报.2008-2-3
[105]陈志武.为什么中国人勤劳而不富[M].北京:中信出版社,2008
[106]邓汉慧,刘帆,赵纹纹.美国创业教育的兴起发展与挑战[EB].滁州共青团,http://cache.baidu.com
[107]丁小浩.教育的个人内部收益率的计算方法评析[J].教育与经济,1998(11)
[108]2006年中国大学生就业状况调查报告公示[EB].原载于江淮晨报,转引自新浪新闻中心http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2006-07-17/02169477629s.shtml
[109]方海跃.人力资本与国际经济竞争[J].世界经济研究,1990(06)
[110]冯子标,焦斌龙.论人力资本营运[J].管理世界,1999(09)
[111]淦未宇,仲伟周.我国高学历者失业的经济学解释[J].科研管理,2004(01): 15-19
[112]高鸿鹰.发展经济学关于分配不平等问题研究的新进展[J] .《国外社会科学》2004年第4期
[113](美)格里高利.克拉克.应该读点经济史——一部世界经济简史[M].北京:中信出版社2009:1-13
[114]谷宏伟“.教育致贫”及其后果:转轨时期中国低收入家庭的教育困境[D].东北财经大学. 2007
[115]顾纪生.评当代西方人力资本理论[J].世界经济文汇,1988(06)
[116]何亦名.中国高校扩招的就业与工资效应研究[M]北京:经济科学出版社2008(10)
[117]何亦名.教育扩张下教育收益率变化的实证分析[J]中国人口科学,2009(04)
[118]侯风云.西方人力资本投资收益分析评述[J]经济学动态,1999(06)
[119]胡永远.不同类型的人力资本对经济增长的影响分析[J].人口与经济,2004(2)
[120]胡永远.替代效应下的个人人力资本投资研究[D].博士学位论文,厦门大学,2001
[121]康宁.论教育决策与制度创新——以’99高校扩招政策为案例的研究[J].高等教育研究,2000(2)
[122]赖德胜.教育扩展与收入不平等[J].经济研究,1997(10)
[123]赖德胜.教育、劳动动力市场与收入分配[J].经济研究,1998(5):42-49
[124]赖德胜.教育与收入分配[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2000
[125]李锋亮,岳昌君,侯龙龙.过度教育与教育的信号功能[J].经济学(季刊),2009(1)
[126]李实,丁赛.中国城镇教育收益率的长期变动趋势[J].中国社会科学,2003(11)
[127]李实,李文彬.中国教育投资的个人收益率的估计[A].赵人伟、格里芬.中国居民收入分配研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1994:442-456
[128]李明忠.高等教育大众化进程中过度教育产生的经济学分析[J].现代大学教育,2004(08)
[129]李薇辉.劳动经济问题研究[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2005
[130]理性客观看待大学扩招[N].光明日报,2008-12-10
[131]李雪松,詹姆斯?赫克曼.选择偏差、比较优势与教育的异质性回报∶基于中国微观数据的实证研究[J].经济研究,2004(04)
[132]李元春.对中国城市教育收益率的实证分析[J].教育与经济,2003(12)
[133]中国社会调查所(SSIC).09应届生就业状况调查[EB]. http://www.chinasurvey.com.cn/social/02-20.htm,2010-10-18
[132]林毅夫.中国的就业问题及对策[J].理论参考,2006(11)
[133]罗忠实.大学生就业——基于二元劳动力市场的探讨[J].当代教育论坛2003(6):100-102
[134](美)曼昆著.梁小民译.经济学原理[M].北京:机械工业出版社,2003
[135]牛长松.美国创业教育的发展历程及其启示[J].职业技术教育,2007(1):88-91
[136]齐良书.国有部门劳动工资制度改革对教育收益率的影响——对1988-1999年中国城市教育收益率的实证研究[J].教育与经济,2005(12)
[137]曲恒昌.西方国家的人力资本理论[J].外国教育动态,1985(03)
[138]瞿振元.“十一五”期间高校毕业生就业趋势及对策[J].中国高教研究,2005(6)
[139]全国劳动力市场信息网监测中心.2005年度全国部分城市劳动力市场供求状况分析[N].2006-03-05
[140]盛世明.过度教育测度方法的比较研究[J].外国教育研究,2004(02)
[141]舒尔兹,林树众.人力资本和中国的生产能力[J].世界经济文汇,1988(04)
[142][美]舒尔茨.蒋斌、张衡(译).人力资本投资——教育和研究的作用[M].北京:商务印书馆,1990
[143]宋华明,庄娱乐.新加坡高校毕业生就业状况评估及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004(4):64-69
[144]孙志军.过度教育的经济学研究述评[J].经济学动态,2001(05)
[145]唐可月,张凤林.教育信号发送作用的经验验证研究综述[J].经济评论,2006(1):148-154
[146]田永坡.高等教育扩展与“知识失业”:国外的研究和经验[J].等教育研究,2006(07)
[147]王军,吴宜璇.特区大学生就业意向调查统计分析[J].特区经济,2007(2)
[148]王书峰.美国退役军人教育资助政策形成与变迁研究[D].北京大学,2007
[49]王小鲁.我国国民收入分配现状、问题及对策[J].国家行政学院学报2010(3):23-37
[150]文冬毛,蓝劲松.过度教育研究的方法、结论及启示[J].比较教育研究,2000(12)
[151](美)伍德里奇,J.M.计量经济学导论(第三版)[M]北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2007:500-502
[152]吴克明,赖德胜.大学生自愿性失业的经济学分析[J].高等教育研究,2004(2):38
[153]吴志功,乔志宏.美国大学生生涯发展与就业指导理论评述[J].比较教育研究,2004年06期
[154]武向荣.过度教育的经验研究——基于对3家企业的调查[J].教育与经济,2005(6)
[155]武向荣.教育扩展中的过度教育现象及其收入效应——基于中国现状的经验研究[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007(5)
[156]谢维和,王洪才.从分配到择业[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2001
[157]谢作诗,杨克瑞.大学生就业难问题的制度经济学分析[J].北京教育,2007(9)
[158]谢作诗,袁晖光,高希宁.要尽可能地让经济保有古典的特征[N].经济学消息报2008-1-11
[159]许学军.技术进步、收入分配与人力资本形成:以东亚与拉美为例的分析及对中国问题的启示[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[160]杨菊华.社会统计分析与数据处理技术------STATA软件的应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
[161]姚先国,周礼,来君.技术进步,技能需求与就业结构------基于制造业微观数据的技能偏态假说检验[J].中国人口科学,2005(5)
[162]叶海燕.平衡就业结构以发挥我国的比较优势[J].特区经济2007(3)
[163](美)伊兰伯格在《现代劳动经济学—理论与公共政策[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1999
[164]于德弘,陆根书.论我国高等教育扩展对收入分配公平的影响[J].教育与经济,2001(1)
[165]夏业良.中国的财富集中度超过美国[EB]。新华网-财经国家周刊. http://www.ennweekly.com/newsview.asp?id=434. 2010-6-17
[166]岳昌君.我国外贸出口结构变化与比较优势实证分析[J].国际经贸探索,2000(3)
[167]岳昌君.中美大学生就业状况的比较研究[J].北大教育经济研究(电子季刊),第6卷第2期:18-23
[168]岳昌君,丁小浩.教育投资比例的国际比较[J].教育研究,2003(5):58-63
[169]岳昌君,丁小浩.大学生就业影响因素的实证分析[J].国家教育行政学院学报,2004a (2):80-86页
[170]岳昌君,丁小浩.受高等教育者就业的经济学分析[J].高等教育研究,2004 b(6):21-27
[171]岳昌君,文东茅,丁小浩.求职与起薪:高校毕业生就业竞争力的实证分析[J].管理世界,2004(11):53-61
[172]张炳申,周文良.珠三角工业转型分析――以东莞为例[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2005(10)
[173]张桂文.统筹城乡发展促进二元经济结构转换[J].辽宁大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(1)
[174]张桂文.二元结构转换中非城市化道路反思[J].宏观经济研究,2004(4)
[175]张桂文.中国二元经济结构演变的历史考察与特征分析[J].宏观经济研究,2001(8)
[176]张洪亚.美、英、日三国高等教育大众化扩张重点之比较和借鉴[J].现代大学教育,2002(3):99-102
[177]赵秋成.教育投资社会收益率的估算方法及其实证分析[J]教育与经济,1999(03)
[178]赵世奎,张彦通.劳动力市场岗位效用分布对过度教育的影响[J].教育与经济,2008(03)
[169]赵世奎,张彦通.浅析我国过度教育现象的成因及其影响[J].教育与职业,2005(16)
[180]赵淑梅.斯坦福大学的创业教育及其启示[J].现代教育科学,2004(6):P17-20
[181]中国就业促进会.2005年大学毕业生就业状况统计[R].2006-03-24
[182]周礼.技术进步与人力资本形成---基于员工与企业的微观视角[D],浙江大学,2006
[183]周天勇.中国的刘易斯拐点并未来临[EB].人民网—人民日报海外版,http://www.sina.com.cn,2010-10-12 07:36
[184]周文兴.中国城镇居民收入分配与经济增长关系实证分析[J].经济科学,2002(1)
[2] Acemoglu,D.Technical change,inequality,and the labor market.[J].Journal of Economic Literature,2002(3): 7-72
[3] Alba-Ramirez,A.Mismatch in the Spanish labor market?[J]. Journal of Human Resources,1993,28(2):259-278
[4] Allen,S. G.“Technology and the wage structure.”1976,NBER Working Paper No. 5534
[5] Autor,D. H. Katz,L. F.,Krueger,A.B. Computing inequality: have computers changed the labor market?[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics , 1998 ,113(4):1169-1213.
[6] Baldwin,R. E. Patterns of development in newly settled regions[J]. The Manchester School. 1956(104):161-179
[7] Battu,H. Belfield,C.R.,Sloane,P.J. Overeducation among graduates: a cohort view[J],Educaiton Economics,1999,7(1): 21-38
[8] Becker,Gary. Human capital:a theoretical and empirical analysis,with special reference to education[M]. Columbia University Press,1964
[9] Berg,I.,Freedman,M. Managers and work reform: a limited engagement. New York: Free Press,1978
[10] Berman,E. Bound,J.,Griliches,Z. Changes in the demand for skilled labor within U.S. manufacturing industries: evidence from the annual survey of manufacturing[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(2):367-397.
[11] Bils , Mark , Klenow , P.J.Does schooling cause growth[J]. AmericanEconomicReview,2000,90(5):1160-1183.
[12] Borghans,L. Educational choice and labour market information[D]. Limburg University,Maastricht,1993
[13] Borghans de Grip,L.,A.,Heijke,H. Labor market information and the choice of vocational specialization[J]. Economics of Education Review,1996,15(1): 59-74.
[14] Bound,J.,George J. Changes in the structure of wages in the 1980’s: an evaluation of alternative explanations[J]. American Economic Review .1992(82):371-92.
[15] Brecher,R.A.,Choudhri,E.U. The factor content of consumption in Canada and the United States: a two-country test of the Hechscher-Ohlin-Vanek model[A].Robert C.Feenstra. Empirical Mehtods for International Trade[C].Cambridge:MA:MIT Press,1988: 5-17
[16] Brennan,J. and McGeevor,P.A.Graduates at work: degree courses and the labour market[M],London: Jessica Kingsley,1988
[17] Breneman , D.W. Liberal arts colleges , thriving , surviving , or endangered?[M].Washington/D.C.:The Brookings Institution,1994
[18] Brown , C. , Campbell B. Technological change and wage structures in semiconductor companies. Center for Work,Technology,and Society Working Paper,University of California,Berkeley,1999
[19] Carnoy,M. International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education,second edition[M]. Oxford: Pergamon,1995
[20] Cheng,W.Sachs,J.,Yang,X.A general equilibrium re-appraisal of the Stolper-Samuelson theorem[J].Journal of Ecnomics,2000a(66):1-18
[21] Cheng,W.,Sachs,J.,Yang,X..An inframargian analysis of the Ricardian model[J].Review of International Economics,2000b(8)
[22] Cheng,W.,Sachs,J.,Yang,X.. An inframargian analysis of the Hechscher-Ohlin model with transaction costs and technological comparative advantage[J].Harvard Center for International Development Working Paper 1999,No.9
[23] Cheng.W.,Liu,M.,Yang,X.A Ricardo model with endogenous comparative advantage and endogenous comparative advantage and endogenous trade policy regime[J].Economic Record,2000(76)
[24] Daniels,P. Economic gains from technology-intensive trade: an empirical assessment[J]. Cambridge Journal o economics,1999(123):24-35
[25] Davis , S. , Haltiwanger , J. Wage dispersion between and within U.S. manufacturing plants: 1963-1986[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics. 1991:115-200
[26] Denison,E.F. Measurement of labor Input: some questions of definition and the adequacy of data[J]. Out put , Input , and Productivity Measurement ,1960:347-372
[27] Denison,E.F. Sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternative before us. Committee for Economic Development,1962
[28] Denison,E.F. Why growth rates differ[J]. The Brookings Instition,1967
[29] Denison,E.F. Trends in American economic growth,1929-1982.The Brookings Institution,1985
[30] DiNardo,J.,Pischke,J.S. The returns to computer use revisited: have pencils changed the wage structure too ? [J] Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997(112): 291-303.
[31] Doms,M.Timothy,D.,Troske,K. Workers,wages,and technology[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1997(112):253-290.
[32] Drucker,P.F. Innovation and entrepreneurship[M]. New York:Harper,Row.1985
[33] Duncan,G. J.,Hoffman,S. D. The incidence and wage effects of overeducation[J]. Economics of Education Review 1981,1(Winter):75-86
[34] Fisher,I.The theory of interest,The Macmillan company. 1930
[35] Freeman,R.The overeducated American,New York: Academic Press,1976.
[36] [36]Gancia,,Zilibotti,F. Technological change and the wealth of nations Gino[J].Annual Review of Economics,2009,1(April): 93-120
[37] Groot , W. , Maassen van den Brink , H. Allocation and the returns to overeducation in the United Kingdom[J].Education Economics. 1997(5):169-183
[38] Harbison , Ralph W. Colombia[A]. Lewis , W. A. Tropical development 1880-1913[C]. Evanston: Northwestern University Press,1970:64-99
[39] Hartog,J. Allocation and the earnings function. Empirical Economics,1986,11(2):97-110.
[40] Freeman,R. The facts about the declining economic value of college[J]. Human Resources,1976(15): 124-142
[41] Gadrey,J.Catrice,J.,Ribault,T. Levels and systems of employment implications of skill-biased technological change: international evidence[J]. Oxford Economic Papers,2001(153):21-30
[42] Golladay,M. The condition of education[M]. Washington,DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,1976 Edition.
[43] Gorman , G. Hanlon , D. , King , W. Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education,enterprise education,and education for small business management:A ten-year literature review [J]. International Small Business Journal,1997(15):56-77
[44] Greenwood,J. Mehmet,Y. 1974[Z].Carnegie-Rochester Conference. Series. Public 1997(46),pp. 49–95.
[45] Greene,W. Fixed effects and bias due to the incidental parameters problem in the Tobit Model[J]. Econometric Reviews,2004(23): 125-147.
[46] Gregeory,M.,Zissinos,B. Jobs for the skilled,new technology and demand change the structure of UK employment[A]. 1979-1990 Oxford Economic Papers 2001(153):42-50
[47] Grossman , G. , Helpman , E..Comparative advantage and long-run growth[J].American Economic Review,1999(80)
[48] Gunderson,M.,Krashinsky,H. Do education decisions respond to returns by field of study[A]. University of Toronto Canadian Labour Market and Skills Researcher Network Working Paper[M]. 2009,47(November)
[49] Habermalz,S. Job matching and the returns to educational signals[A]. IZA Discussion Paper[M]. 2003(726)
[50] Hartog,J.,Oosterbeek,H. Education,allocation and earnings in the Netherlands: over-schooling?[J] Economics of Education Review,1988,7( 2):185-194
[51] House,J. The effects of occupational stress on physical health[A]. O’Toole,J.In work and the quality of life[C],Cambridge:MA.MIT Press.1974:145-170.
[52] Johnson,B. F.,Mellor,J.W. The role of agriculture in economic development[J]. American Economic Review,1961(L1):566-93
[53] [53]Juhn,Ch. Kevin,M.,Pierce,B. Wage inequality and the rise in returns to skill[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1993(101):410-442.
[54] Karabel,J.,Halsey,A.H. Power and ideology in education[M]. Oxford University Press,New York. 1977
[55] Katz,L. F.,Murphy,K. Changes in relative wages,1963-1987: supply anddemand factors[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992(107): 36-78
[56] Kelly,R.,Lewis,P. E.T.The changing pattern of skill demand in the Australia economy[R] , Paper presented to the Third International Conference on Knowledge,Culture and Change in Organisations,Penang,10-14 August 2003 and The 32ND Conference of Economists 2003,Australian National University,29 September– 1 October 2003
[57] Kiker,B. F. Sntors,C.,Mendes De Oliverira,M. Overeducation and undereducation: evidence for Prtugal[J]. Economics of Education Review,1997,16(2): 111-125
[58] Kroch,E. A.,Sjoblom,K. Schooling as human capital or a signal: some evidence[J].The Journal of Human Resources,1994,29(1): 156-180.
[59] Krueger,A. How computers have changed the wage structure: evidence from micro-data 1984-1989[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993(108):33-60
[60] Krugman,P.R. Technology,trade and factor prices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2000(50): 774-881
[61] Levy,F.,Murnane,R. With what skills are computers a complement[A]. AEA Papers and Proceedings[C],1996: 258-262.
[62] Lewis,W. A. Report on the industrialization of the Gold Coast[M]. Accra: Government printing office of the Gold Coast,1953:
[63] Lucas,R.E.Jr. On the mechanics of economic development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economy,1988(22):2-42
[64] Machin,S. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,2001,Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,2002,63 (s1):753-776
[65] Maskus,K.E. A test of the Hechscher-Ohlin-Vanek theorem: the Leontief Commonplace[J].Journal of International Economics,1985(Nov.)
[66] Mankiw,G.,RomeR&D.,Weil,D.A contribution to the emirics of economic growth[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1992,107(2):407-437
[67] McGuinness,S. Graduate overeducation as a sheepskin effect: evidence from Northern Ireland[J]. Applied Economics,2003(35):597–608
[68] Miller,A. Occupations of the labor force according to the dictionary of occupational titles[A]. Mimeograghed. Philadelphia , PA: PennsylvaniaUniversity,Population Studies Center,1971
[69] Minhas,B.S.The honohypallagic production function,factor-intensity reversals,and the Hechscher-Ohlin theorem[J].Journal of Political Economy ,1962(Apr):138-156
[70] Murphy,K.M,Shleifler,A.,Vishny,R. Income distribution,market size,and industrialization[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1989 ,104(3):537-564
[71] North,D. C. Agriculture in regional ecohomic growth[J]. Journal of Farm Economics,1959(L1): 943-951
[72] Psacharopolos , G.Returns to education: an update international comparison[J].Comparative Education Review,1981,17(3): 321-341
[73] Psacharopolos,G.Returns to education: a further international update and implications[J].The Journal of Human Resources,1985,20(4):583-604
[74] Psacharopolos,G,Woodhall,M..Education for development:an analysis of investment choices[Z].Oxford University Press.1985
[75] Psacharopolos , G.Rates of return to investment in education around the world[J].Comparative Education,1972,16(1):54-67
[76] Psacharopolos,G.,Patrinos,H.A.Returns to investment in education: A further update[R].World Bank Policy Research Working Paper,No.2881
[77] [76]Psacharopoulos,G.,Economics of education: research and studies[M]. Oxford: Pergamon,1987
[78] Quinn,R. and Shepard,L. The 1972-73 quality of employment survey: descriptive statistics,with comparison data from 1969-70 survey of working conditions[A]. Ann Arbor. MI: University of Michigan,Survey Research Center. 1974
[79] Quinn,R and Mandlovitch,M. Education and job satisfaction: a questionable payoff[A]. Ann Arbor,MI: University of Michigan,Survey Research Center. 1975
[80] Ranis,G. Industrial development[A]. Galenson,W. Economic growth and structural change in Taiwan[C].Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press,1979
[81] Rumberger,R. Overeducaiton in the U.S. labor market. New York: Praeger. 1981
[82] Schomburg,H.,Teichler,U. Higher education and graduate employment in Europe: results from graduate surveys from twelve countries,Springer,Dordrecht,Netherlands,2006
[83] Seohgoon,K.,Dong-Pyo,H. Technological change and demand for skills in developing countries[J]. The Developing Economics 2002(6) : 559-618
[84] Sheppard,H.,Herrick,N. Where have all the robots gone? Worker dissatisfaction in the‘70s[M]. New York: Free Press,1972
[85] Sicherman,N.“Overeducaiton”in the labfor market[J]. Journal of Labor Economics,1991,9(2):101-122
[86] Sloane,P. J. Much ado About Nothing? What does the Overeducation Literature Really Tell us?[A].
[87] Felix Büchel,A. de Grip,Antje Mertens. Overeducation in Europe: Current Issues in Theory and policy[C]. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar,2003
[88] Staiger,R.W.Aspecification test o fthe Hechscher-Ohlin Theory[J].Journal of Political Economy,1993(Nov.)
[89] Spence,M. Job market signaling[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1973(87): 355-374
[90] Tamsin Bowers,B.,Lee Harvey,Are there too many graduates in the UK? A literature review and analysis of graduate employability[J],Industry and Higher Education,August 2004,243-254
[91] Taylor,J. R. Rural employment trends and the legacy of surplus labor: 1978-1989[A]. Economic Trends in Chinese Agriculture: The Impact of Post Mao Reforms[C]. New York: Oxford University Press,2003
[92] Teichler,U. Changing patterns of the higher education Ssystem,London: J. Kingsley,1988
[93] Teichler,U. Occupational structures and higher education[A]. Clark,B. R. and Neave,G. R.,eds.,The Encyclopedia of Higher Education[C]. Pergamon,Oxford,1992:975-992.
[94] Thurow,L. Generating Inequality: mechanisms of distribution in the U.S. economy[M]. NewYork: Basic Books,1975.
[95] Tian Qiu. Private returns to education: earnings,health and well-being [D],University of Bath,2007(9)
[96] Trefler,Daniel.International factor price differences: Leontief was right![J]. Journal of Politial Economy,December 1993,101(6)
[97] Tsang,Mun C.,Levin,Henry M. Economics of overeducation[J].Economics of Education Review. 1985,4(2): 93-104
[98] Wim Groot,,Maassen van den Brink,H. Allocation and the returns to overeducatio in the United Kingdom[J]. Education Economics. 1997(5): 169-183
[99] Yankelovich,D. The new morality: a profile of American Youth in the‘70s. New York: McGraw-Hill,1974
[100]蔡昉.劳动力无限供给时代结束[J].金融经济,2008(3)
[101]陈成文,谭日辉.人力资本与大学毕业生就业的关系——基于2003、2004届大学毕业生的实证研究[J].高等教育研究.2004(6)
[102]陈晓宇,陈良焜,夏晨.20世纪90年代中国城镇教育收益率的变化与启示[J].北京大学教育评论,2003(04)
[103]陈晓宇,闵维方.我国高等教育个人收益率研究[J].高等教育研究,1998(11)
[104]陈志武.我们的政府有多大[N].经济观察报.2008-2-3
[105]陈志武.为什么中国人勤劳而不富[M].北京:中信出版社,2008
[106]邓汉慧,刘帆,赵纹纹.美国创业教育的兴起发展与挑战[EB].滁州共青团,http://cache.baidu.com
[107]丁小浩.教育的个人内部收益率的计算方法评析[J].教育与经济,1998(11)
[108]2006年中国大学生就业状况调查报告公示[EB].原载于江淮晨报,转引自新浪新闻中心http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2006-07-17/02169477629s.shtml
[109]方海跃.人力资本与国际经济竞争[J].世界经济研究,1990(06)
[110]冯子标,焦斌龙.论人力资本营运[J].管理世界,1999(09)
[111]淦未宇,仲伟周.我国高学历者失业的经济学解释[J].科研管理,2004(01): 15-19
[112]高鸿鹰.发展经济学关于分配不平等问题研究的新进展[J] .《国外社会科学》2004年第4期
[113](美)格里高利.克拉克.应该读点经济史——一部世界经济简史[M].北京:中信出版社2009:1-13
[114]谷宏伟“.教育致贫”及其后果:转轨时期中国低收入家庭的教育困境[D].东北财经大学. 2007
[115]顾纪生.评当代西方人力资本理论[J].世界经济文汇,1988(06)
[116]何亦名.中国高校扩招的就业与工资效应研究[M]北京:经济科学出版社2008(10)
[117]何亦名.教育扩张下教育收益率变化的实证分析[J]中国人口科学,2009(04)
[118]侯风云.西方人力资本投资收益分析评述[J]经济学动态,1999(06)
[119]胡永远.不同类型的人力资本对经济增长的影响分析[J].人口与经济,2004(2)
[120]胡永远.替代效应下的个人人力资本投资研究[D].博士学位论文,厦门大学,2001
[121]康宁.论教育决策与制度创新——以’99高校扩招政策为案例的研究[J].高等教育研究,2000(2)
[122]赖德胜.教育扩展与收入不平等[J].经济研究,1997(10)
[123]赖德胜.教育、劳动动力市场与收入分配[J].经济研究,1998(5):42-49
[124]赖德胜.教育与收入分配[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2000
[125]李锋亮,岳昌君,侯龙龙.过度教育与教育的信号功能[J].经济学(季刊),2009(1)
[126]李实,丁赛.中国城镇教育收益率的长期变动趋势[J].中国社会科学,2003(11)
[127]李实,李文彬.中国教育投资的个人收益率的估计[A].赵人伟、格里芬.中国居民收入分配研究[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1994:442-456
[128]李明忠.高等教育大众化进程中过度教育产生的经济学分析[J].现代大学教育,2004(08)
[129]李薇辉.劳动经济问题研究[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2005
[130]理性客观看待大学扩招[N].光明日报,2008-12-10
[131]李雪松,詹姆斯?赫克曼.选择偏差、比较优势与教育的异质性回报∶基于中国微观数据的实证研究[J].经济研究,2004(04)
[132]李元春.对中国城市教育收益率的实证分析[J].教育与经济,2003(12)
[133]中国社会调查所(SSIC).09应届生就业状况调查[EB]. http://www.chinasurvey.com.cn/social/02-20.htm,2010-10-18
[132]林毅夫.中国的就业问题及对策[J].理论参考,2006(11)
[133]罗忠实.大学生就业——基于二元劳动力市场的探讨[J].当代教育论坛2003(6):100-102
[134](美)曼昆著.梁小民译.经济学原理[M].北京:机械工业出版社,2003
[135]牛长松.美国创业教育的发展历程及其启示[J].职业技术教育,2007(1):88-91
[136]齐良书.国有部门劳动工资制度改革对教育收益率的影响——对1988-1999年中国城市教育收益率的实证研究[J].教育与经济,2005(12)
[137]曲恒昌.西方国家的人力资本理论[J].外国教育动态,1985(03)
[138]瞿振元.“十一五”期间高校毕业生就业趋势及对策[J].中国高教研究,2005(6)
[139]全国劳动力市场信息网监测中心.2005年度全国部分城市劳动力市场供求状况分析[N].2006-03-05
[140]盛世明.过度教育测度方法的比较研究[J].外国教育研究,2004(02)
[141]舒尔兹,林树众.人力资本和中国的生产能力[J].世界经济文汇,1988(04)
[142][美]舒尔茨.蒋斌、张衡(译).人力资本投资——教育和研究的作用[M].北京:商务印书馆,1990
[143]宋华明,庄娱乐.新加坡高校毕业生就业状况评估及启示[J].比较教育研究,2004(4):64-69
[144]孙志军.过度教育的经济学研究述评[J].经济学动态,2001(05)
[145]唐可月,张凤林.教育信号发送作用的经验验证研究综述[J].经济评论,2006(1):148-154
[146]田永坡.高等教育扩展与“知识失业”:国外的研究和经验[J].等教育研究,2006(07)
[147]王军,吴宜璇.特区大学生就业意向调查统计分析[J].特区经济,2007(2)
[148]王书峰.美国退役军人教育资助政策形成与变迁研究[D].北京大学,2007
[49]王小鲁.我国国民收入分配现状、问题及对策[J].国家行政学院学报2010(3):23-37
[150]文冬毛,蓝劲松.过度教育研究的方法、结论及启示[J].比较教育研究,2000(12)
[151](美)伍德里奇,J.M.计量经济学导论(第三版)[M]北京:中国人民大学出版社. 2007:500-502
[152]吴克明,赖德胜.大学生自愿性失业的经济学分析[J].高等教育研究,2004(2):38
[153]吴志功,乔志宏.美国大学生生涯发展与就业指导理论评述[J].比较教育研究,2004年06期
[154]武向荣.过度教育的经验研究——基于对3家企业的调查[J].教育与经济,2005(6)
[155]武向荣.教育扩展中的过度教育现象及其收入效应——基于中国现状的经验研究[J].北京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007(5)
[156]谢维和,王洪才.从分配到择业[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2001
[157]谢作诗,杨克瑞.大学生就业难问题的制度经济学分析[J].北京教育,2007(9)
[158]谢作诗,袁晖光,高希宁.要尽可能地让经济保有古典的特征[N].经济学消息报2008-1-11
[159]许学军.技术进步、收入分配与人力资本形成:以东亚与拉美为例的分析及对中国问题的启示[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[160]杨菊华.社会统计分析与数据处理技术------STATA软件的应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003
[161]姚先国,周礼,来君.技术进步,技能需求与就业结构------基于制造业微观数据的技能偏态假说检验[J].中国人口科学,2005(5)
[162]叶海燕.平衡就业结构以发挥我国的比较优势[J].特区经济2007(3)
[163](美)伊兰伯格在《现代劳动经济学—理论与公共政策[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1999
[164]于德弘,陆根书.论我国高等教育扩展对收入分配公平的影响[J].教育与经济,2001(1)
[165]夏业良.中国的财富集中度超过美国[EB]。新华网-财经国家周刊. http://www.ennweekly.com/newsview.asp?id=434. 2010-6-17
[166]岳昌君.我国外贸出口结构变化与比较优势实证分析[J].国际经贸探索,2000(3)
[167]岳昌君.中美大学生就业状况的比较研究[J].北大教育经济研究(电子季刊),第6卷第2期:18-23
[168]岳昌君,丁小浩.教育投资比例的国际比较[J].教育研究,2003(5):58-63
[169]岳昌君,丁小浩.大学生就业影响因素的实证分析[J].国家教育行政学院学报,2004a (2):80-86页
[170]岳昌君,丁小浩.受高等教育者就业的经济学分析[J].高等教育研究,2004 b(6):21-27
[171]岳昌君,文东茅,丁小浩.求职与起薪:高校毕业生就业竞争力的实证分析[J].管理世界,2004(11):53-61
[172]张炳申,周文良.珠三角工业转型分析――以东莞为例[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2005(10)
[173]张桂文.统筹城乡发展促进二元经济结构转换[J].辽宁大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(1)
[174]张桂文.二元结构转换中非城市化道路反思[J].宏观经济研究,2004(4)
[175]张桂文.中国二元经济结构演变的历史考察与特征分析[J].宏观经济研究,2001(8)
[176]张洪亚.美、英、日三国高等教育大众化扩张重点之比较和借鉴[J].现代大学教育,2002(3):99-102
[177]赵秋成.教育投资社会收益率的估算方法及其实证分析[J]教育与经济,1999(03)
[178]赵世奎,张彦通.劳动力市场岗位效用分布对过度教育的影响[J].教育与经济,2008(03)
[169]赵世奎,张彦通.浅析我国过度教育现象的成因及其影响[J].教育与职业,2005(16)
[180]赵淑梅.斯坦福大学的创业教育及其启示[J].现代教育科学,2004(6):P17-20
[181]中国就业促进会.2005年大学毕业生就业状况统计[R].2006-03-24
[182]周礼.技术进步与人力资本形成---基于员工与企业的微观视角[D],浙江大学,2006
[183]周天勇.中国的刘易斯拐点并未来临[EB].人民网—人民日报海外版,http://www.sina.com.cn,2010-10-12 07:36
[184]周文兴.中国城镇居民收入分配与经济增长关系实证分析[J].经济科学,2002(1)