高端服务业发展与技能溢价:基于非认知能力的微观机理解析与实证检验
|
摘要
将高端服务业发展、非认知能力与技能溢价纳入统一理论框架进行分析,并基于非认知能力视角将高端服务业发展对技能溢价的影响机制分为工资效应与技能配置结构效应。采用2010—2016年中国家庭追踪调查数据(CFPS)与省级层面匹配数据的实证分析结果表明,高端服务业发展可通过提升技能劳动的非认知能力回报影响技能溢价,并且经过控制选择性偏差、内生性问题及稳健性检验之后,结论依然成立;进一步结合美国职业信息网O*NET数据,通过自选择效应检验高端服务业影响技能溢价的技能配置结构效应,结果表明,非认知能力较高的技能劳动者会自选择进入非认知能力密集度较高的职业组,以发挥比较优势获得更高的技能溢价。
The development of high-level service industries will reshape the labor demand structure and income distribution.In this paper we put high-level service industries development,noncognitive skills and skill premium into a unified theoretical framework,and propose a micro-mechanism interpretation from job tasks perspective for the increasing skill premium.The empirical results based on the matching data of CFPS 2010—2016 and provincial-level show that the difference in non-cognitive skills returns is an important factor for the increasing skill premium.The development of high-level service industries can affect the skill premium through affecting the non-cognitive skills return differently,and the above conclusions are still robust after eliminating the problem of selection bias and?endogenous problems and conducting various types of robustness tests.Furthermore,we test the self-selection effect of occupational mobility with the O*NET data of the US Occupational Information Network.The results show that skilled workers with higher non-cognitive skills will choose to enter into a more non-cognitive intensive occupational group to gain a higher skill premium with their comparative advantages.This paper provides a new perspective for skill premium,and also provides more targeted empirical evidence for building a human capital accumulation system that is compatible with skill needs.
The development of high-level service industries will reshape the labor demand structure and income distribution.In this paper we put high-level service industries development,noncognitive skills and skill premium into a unified theoretical framework,and propose a micro-mechanism interpretation from job tasks perspective for the increasing skill premium.The empirical results based on the matching data of CFPS 2010—2016 and provincial-level show that the difference in non-cognitive skills returns is an important factor for the increasing skill premium.The development of high-level service industries can affect the skill premium through affecting the non-cognitive skills return differently,and the above conclusions are still robust after eliminating the problem of selection bias and?endogenous problems and conducting various types of robustness tests.Furthermore,we test the self-selection effect of occupational mobility with the O*NET data of the US Occupational Information Network.The results show that skilled workers with higher non-cognitive skills will choose to enter into a more non-cognitive intensive occupational group to gain a higher skill premium with their comparative advantages.This paper provides a new perspective for skill premium,and also provides more targeted empirical evidence for building a human capital accumulation system that is compatible with skill needs.
引文
[1]AUTOR D H,KRUGER A B,KATZ L F.Computing inequality:have computers changed the labor market[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1169-1213.
[2]ACMOGLU D,AUTOR D H.Skills,tasks&technologies:implications for employment&earnings[M].[S.l.]:Elsevier,2011.
[3]TOPALOVA P.Factor immobility and regional impacts of trade liberalization:evidence on poverty from India[J].American Economic Journal Applied Economics,2010,2(4):1-41.
[4]董直庆,蔡啸,王林辉,技能溢价:基于技术进步方向的解释[J].中国社会科学,2014(10):22-40。
[5]陈斌开,张鹏飞,杨汝岱.政府教育投入、人力资本投资与中国城乡收入差距[J].管理世界,2010(1):36-43。
[6]GE S,YANG D T.Changes in China’s wage structure[J].Journal of the European Economic Association,2014,12(2):300-336.
[7]JUHN C,MURPHY K M,PIERCE B.Wage inequality and the rise in returns to skill[J].Journal of Political Economy,1993,101(3):410-442.
[8]KATZ L F,MURPHY K M.Changes in relative wages,1963-1987:supply and demand factors[J].Social Science Electronic Publishing,1991,107(1):35-78.
[9]HECKMAN J J,STIXRUD J,URZUA S.The effects of cognitive and non-cognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior[J].Journal of Labor Economics,2006,24(3):411-482.
[10]HECKMAN J J,KAUTZ T.Evidence on soft skills[J].Labour Economics,2012,19(4):451.
[11]程虹,李唐.人格特征对于劳动力工资的影响效应---基于中国企业-员工匹配调查(CEES)的实证研究[J].经济研究,2017,52(2):171-186。
[12]黄国英,谢宇.认知能力与非认知能力对青年劳动收入回报的影响[J].中国青年研究,2017(2):56-64。
[13]BOWLES S,GINTIS H,OSBORNE M.The determinants of earnings:a behavioral approach[J].Journal of Economic Literature,2001,39(4):1137-1176.
[14]CRIFO P.Sill supply&biased technical change[J].Labour Economics,2008,15(5):812-830.
[15]TINBERGEN J.Substitution of graduate by other labor[J].Kyklos 1974,(27):217-226.
[16]ACEMOGLU D.Why do new technologies complement skills?Directed technical change and wage inequality[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1055-1089.
[17]SPITZ-OENER A.Technical change,job tasks,and rising educational demands:looking outside the wage structure[J].Journal of Labor Economics,2006,24(2):235-270.
[18]AUTOR D H,LEVY F,MURNANE R J.The skill content of recent technological change:an empirical exploration[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2003,118(4):1279-1333.
[19]AUTOR D,DORN D.The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market[J].The American Economic Review,2013,103(5):1553-1597.
[20]GOOS M,MANNING A,SALOMONS A.Explaining job polarization:routine-biased technological change and offshoring[J].LSE Research Online Documents on Economics,2014,104(8):2509-2526.
[21]AUTOR D H.Why are there still so many jobs?The history and future of workplace automation[J].Journal of Economic Perspectives,2015,29(3):3-30.
[22]DEMING D.The growing importance of social skills in the labor market[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2017,132(4):1593-1640.
[23]EDIN P A,FREDRIKSSON P,NYBOM M.The rising return to non-cognitive skill[J].IZA Discussion Papers,2017.
[24]LINDQVIST E,VESTMAN R.The labor market returns to cognitive and non-cognitive ability:evidence from the swedish enlistment[J].American Economic Journal Applied Economics,2011,3(1):101-128.
[25]徐舒.技术进步、教育收益与收入不平等[J].经济研究,2010,45(9):79-92。
[26]杨飞.市场化、技能偏向性技术进步与技能溢价[J].世界经济,2017,40(2):78-100。
[27]ALMLUND M,DUCKWORTH A L,HECKMANJ.Chapter 1-Personality Psychology&Economics[M].Handbook of the Economics of Education,2011,4(3):1-181.
[28]李涛,朱俊兵,伏霖.聪明人更愿意创业吗?---来自中国的经验发现[J].经济研究,2017,52(3):91-105。
[29]孔高文,刘莎莎,孔东民.我们为何离开故乡?家庭社会资本、性别、能力与毕业生就业选择[J].经济学(季刊),2017,16(2):621-648。
[30]HECKMAN J,RUBINSTEIN Y.The importance of non-cognitive skills:lessons from the GED testing program[J].American Economic Review2001,91(2):145-149.
[31]HECKMAN J,PINTO R,SAVELYEV P.Understanding the mechanisms through which an influential early childhood program boosted adult outcomes[J].The American Economic Review,2013,3(6):1-35.|
(1)技能溢价,一般是指受过高等教育与未受过高等教育的劳动工资收入差距,也有部分研究用生产性—非生产性工人工资之比或者蓝领-白领工人工资差距表示。本文采用多数文献划分方式,按是否拥有大学学历将劳动进行技能与非技能分类。
(1)非认知能力的重要性也正在引起国内外相关部门组织的重视。2015年,一项来自美国全国大学和雇主协会(NACE,National Association of Colleges and Employers)的调查显示,雇主纷纷将合作能力与口头表达能力放在的重要的位置(NACE,2015)。2015年北京青年压力管理中心联合新浪网与腾讯网推出的《2015年大学生就业报告》表明,已入职群体最看重“沟通能力”,同时“适应能力”仅次于“专业技能”排在了第三位。
(1)具体职业任务内容分类一般包括:程序化认知型(Routine Cognitive)、程序化操作型(Routine Manual)、非程序化认知型(Non-routine Cognitive)以及非程序化互动型(Non-routine Interpersonal)。
(1)2010年美国经济学年会专门以人力资本新进展作为其中一个小组议题进行学者讨论,Hanushek(2010)提出为了更好的了解个体的经济社会表现我们需要制定一个基于能力的“新人力资本”的研究议程。
(2)非认知能力(non-cognitive),与认知能力(cognitive)相对应,但认知能力可以较好的通过受教育水平来反映。而非认知能力的内容则更广泛,衡量指标也更灵活,对其测度标准学术界尚无共识。一般是指合作意识,适应能力,沟通能力,社交能力等不能完全通过教育测度的人格特征。2015年,一项来自美国全国大学和雇主协会(NACE,National Association of Colleges and Employers)的调查显示,雇主纷纷将合作能力与口头表达能力放在的重要的位置(NACE,2015)。2015年北京青年压力管理中心联合新浪网与腾讯网推出的《2015年大学生就业报告》表明,已入职群体最看重“沟通能力”,同时“适应能力”仅次于“专业技能”排在了第三位。
(1)受访者观察部分共有12项细分指标,包括受访者理解能力、健康状况、衣冠整洁程度、外貌、普通话能力、配合程度、智力水平、待人接物、对调查的兴趣、对调查的疑虑、回答问题可信度以及语言表达能力。
[2]ACMOGLU D,AUTOR D H.Skills,tasks&technologies:implications for employment&earnings[M].[S.l.]:Elsevier,2011.
[3]TOPALOVA P.Factor immobility and regional impacts of trade liberalization:evidence on poverty from India[J].American Economic Journal Applied Economics,2010,2(4):1-41.
[4]董直庆,蔡啸,王林辉,技能溢价:基于技术进步方向的解释[J].中国社会科学,2014(10):22-40。
[5]陈斌开,张鹏飞,杨汝岱.政府教育投入、人力资本投资与中国城乡收入差距[J].管理世界,2010(1):36-43。
[6]GE S,YANG D T.Changes in China’s wage structure[J].Journal of the European Economic Association,2014,12(2):300-336.
[7]JUHN C,MURPHY K M,PIERCE B.Wage inequality and the rise in returns to skill[J].Journal of Political Economy,1993,101(3):410-442.
[8]KATZ L F,MURPHY K M.Changes in relative wages,1963-1987:supply and demand factors[J].Social Science Electronic Publishing,1991,107(1):35-78.
[9]HECKMAN J J,STIXRUD J,URZUA S.The effects of cognitive and non-cognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior[J].Journal of Labor Economics,2006,24(3):411-482.
[10]HECKMAN J J,KAUTZ T.Evidence on soft skills[J].Labour Economics,2012,19(4):451.
[11]程虹,李唐.人格特征对于劳动力工资的影响效应---基于中国企业-员工匹配调查(CEES)的实证研究[J].经济研究,2017,52(2):171-186。
[12]黄国英,谢宇.认知能力与非认知能力对青年劳动收入回报的影响[J].中国青年研究,2017(2):56-64。
[13]BOWLES S,GINTIS H,OSBORNE M.The determinants of earnings:a behavioral approach[J].Journal of Economic Literature,2001,39(4):1137-1176.
[14]CRIFO P.Sill supply&biased technical change[J].Labour Economics,2008,15(5):812-830.
[15]TINBERGEN J.Substitution of graduate by other labor[J].Kyklos 1974,(27):217-226.
[16]ACEMOGLU D.Why do new technologies complement skills?Directed technical change and wage inequality[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1055-1089.
[17]SPITZ-OENER A.Technical change,job tasks,and rising educational demands:looking outside the wage structure[J].Journal of Labor Economics,2006,24(2):235-270.
[18]AUTOR D H,LEVY F,MURNANE R J.The skill content of recent technological change:an empirical exploration[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,2003,118(4):1279-1333.
[19]AUTOR D,DORN D.The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market[J].The American Economic Review,2013,103(5):1553-1597.
[20]GOOS M,MANNING A,SALOMONS A.Explaining job polarization:routine-biased technological change and offshoring[J].LSE Research Online Documents on Economics,2014,104(8):2509-2526.
[21]AUTOR D H.Why are there still so many jobs?The history and future of workplace automation[J].Journal of Economic Perspectives,2015,29(3):3-30.
[22]DEMING D.The growing importance of social skills in the labor market[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2017,132(4):1593-1640.
[23]EDIN P A,FREDRIKSSON P,NYBOM M.The rising return to non-cognitive skill[J].IZA Discussion Papers,2017.
[24]LINDQVIST E,VESTMAN R.The labor market returns to cognitive and non-cognitive ability:evidence from the swedish enlistment[J].American Economic Journal Applied Economics,2011,3(1):101-128.
[25]徐舒.技术进步、教育收益与收入不平等[J].经济研究,2010,45(9):79-92。
[26]杨飞.市场化、技能偏向性技术进步与技能溢价[J].世界经济,2017,40(2):78-100。
[27]ALMLUND M,DUCKWORTH A L,HECKMANJ.Chapter 1-Personality Psychology&Economics[M].Handbook of the Economics of Education,2011,4(3):1-181.
[28]李涛,朱俊兵,伏霖.聪明人更愿意创业吗?---来自中国的经验发现[J].经济研究,2017,52(3):91-105。
[29]孔高文,刘莎莎,孔东民.我们为何离开故乡?家庭社会资本、性别、能力与毕业生就业选择[J].经济学(季刊),2017,16(2):621-648。
[30]HECKMAN J,RUBINSTEIN Y.The importance of non-cognitive skills:lessons from the GED testing program[J].American Economic Review2001,91(2):145-149.
[31]HECKMAN J,PINTO R,SAVELYEV P.Understanding the mechanisms through which an influential early childhood program boosted adult outcomes[J].The American Economic Review,2013,3(6):1-35.|
(1)技能溢价,一般是指受过高等教育与未受过高等教育的劳动工资收入差距,也有部分研究用生产性—非生产性工人工资之比或者蓝领-白领工人工资差距表示。本文采用多数文献划分方式,按是否拥有大学学历将劳动进行技能与非技能分类。
(1)非认知能力的重要性也正在引起国内外相关部门组织的重视。2015年,一项来自美国全国大学和雇主协会(NACE,National Association of Colleges and Employers)的调查显示,雇主纷纷将合作能力与口头表达能力放在的重要的位置(NACE,2015)。2015年北京青年压力管理中心联合新浪网与腾讯网推出的《2015年大学生就业报告》表明,已入职群体最看重“沟通能力”,同时“适应能力”仅次于“专业技能”排在了第三位。
(1)具体职业任务内容分类一般包括:程序化认知型(Routine Cognitive)、程序化操作型(Routine Manual)、非程序化认知型(Non-routine Cognitive)以及非程序化互动型(Non-routine Interpersonal)。
(1)2010年美国经济学年会专门以人力资本新进展作为其中一个小组议题进行学者讨论,Hanushek(2010)提出为了更好的了解个体的经济社会表现我们需要制定一个基于能力的“新人力资本”的研究议程。
(2)非认知能力(non-cognitive),与认知能力(cognitive)相对应,但认知能力可以较好的通过受教育水平来反映。而非认知能力的内容则更广泛,衡量指标也更灵活,对其测度标准学术界尚无共识。一般是指合作意识,适应能力,沟通能力,社交能力等不能完全通过教育测度的人格特征。2015年,一项来自美国全国大学和雇主协会(NACE,National Association of Colleges and Employers)的调查显示,雇主纷纷将合作能力与口头表达能力放在的重要的位置(NACE,2015)。2015年北京青年压力管理中心联合新浪网与腾讯网推出的《2015年大学生就业报告》表明,已入职群体最看重“沟通能力”,同时“适应能力”仅次于“专业技能”排在了第三位。
(1)受访者观察部分共有12项细分指标,包括受访者理解能力、健康状况、衣冠整洁程度、外貌、普通话能力、配合程度、智力水平、待人接物、对调查的兴趣、对调查的疑虑、回答问题可信度以及语言表达能力。