Building on Lazear’s skill weights approach, we study the effect of having more or less heterogeneity in the training curriculum on supply of and demand for apprenticeship training. Modernizations of training curricula provide us with a quasi-experimental setting as these modernizations can be seen as a relatively exogenous shock. We argue that firms will train more apprentices when they have more choice options in the training curriculum because of (1) the higher productivity of graduates who have acquired more skills that are relevant for the firm, and (2) firms’ higher market power in the wage bargaining process with graduates. We test this hypothesis on data on the supply of apprenticeship places in Germany in all occupations from 2004 to 2014. We find that a more heterogeneous curriculum increases both firms’ supply of and students’ demand for training places.
In this article, the relation between firms’ engagement in apprenticeship training
and two important economic preferences, i.e. the decision maker’s altruism and time
preference, is analyzed. Firstly, the relation between these two preferences and a firm’s
decision to provide apprenticeship places (extensive margin) is examined. Secondly, for
firms that train, the effect on the amount of investments in apprenticeship training
(intensive margin) is analyzed. The results show that the degree of altruism of a decision
maker is positively, albeit weakly significant, associated to the probability to provide
apprenticeship places as well as substantially related to the amount of investments
in apprenticeship training. Time preferences are not related to the training decision
(extensive margin) but significantly related to the amount of investments in training.
This paper estimates peer effects in a university context where students are randomly
assigned to sections. While students benefit from better peers on average, lowachieving
students are harmed by high-achieving peers. Analyzing students’ course
evaluations suggests that peer effects are driven by improved group interaction rather
than adjustments in teachers’ behavior or students’ effort. We further show, building on
Angrist (2014), that classical measurement error in a setting where group assignment
is systematic can lead to substantial overestimation of peer effects. With random
assignment, as is the case in our setting, estimates are only attenuated.
The newsletter with the latest news and developments from ROA is out! Click here to watch the online version.
The report presents forecasts for the Dutch labour market until 2020. It discusses future developments in labour supply and demand by educational types and levels, and by occupation. In particular, the report focusses on a number of key indicators for bottlenecks in the labour market, and the future labour market prospects of graduates.
You can find more information about the project here.
This paper presents the Global Preference Survey, a globally representative dataset on
risk and time preferences, positive and negative reciprocity, altruism, and trust. We
collected these preference data as well as a rich set of covariates for 80,000 individuals,
drawn as representative samples from 76 countries around the world, representing 90
percent of both the world’s population and global income. The global distribution of
preferences exhibits substantial variation across countries, which is partly systematic:
certain preferences appear in combination, and follow distinct economic, institutional,
and geographic patterns. The heterogeneity in preferences across individuals is even
more pronounced and varies systematically with age, gender, and cognitive ability.
Around the world, our preference measures are predictive of a wide range of individual level
behaviors including savings and schooling decisions, labor market and health
choices, prosocial behaviors, and family structure. We also shed light on the cultural
origins of preference variation around the globe using data on language structure.