Search

More and more European higher education students decide to take part in international student mobility (ISM). However, not much is known about the actual benefits of studying abroad. This paper assesses UK and Italian students' returns from ISM. Three research questions are addressed. First, does international student mobility increase graduates' employment probability and postgraduate study uptake? Second, do the returns to ISM differ according to the socio-economic background of graduates? Third, do the returns to ISM vary between two countries with contrasting labour market and education systems? Results, based on propensity score matching, indicate that mobility is positively associated with a higher employment probability. Mobility abroad is likewise linked with a higher likelihood of enrolling in postgraduate studies in Italy. The benefits of mobility in terms of employment do not differ significantly across socio-economic groups. However, mobility is particularly effective in boosting the uptake of postgraduate studies among mobile Italian graduates with a low socio-economic background. In Italy, ISM returns are substantially higher than in the UK, which could reflect that the skills accumulated and the signals sent to potential employers through ISM are greater in Italy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the population growth dynamics in European NUTS3 regions over the period of 2000–2015 and offers generalizable evidence on the main drivers of population change at this sub‐level of analysis, which is so far rather unexplored. Results obtained by means of a spatial Durbin model highlight the roles of economic and demographic regional conditions in shaping population dynamics and the minor role of geography and environmental conditions. The fact that geographical polarization of population is occurring, which might result in an increase in regional imbalances, calls for policy actions in mitigating this phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Previous research has identified the role of social capital in explaining variations in health in the countries of the former Soviet Union. This study explores whether the benefits of social capital vary among these countries and why. Methods The impact of micro social capital (trust, membership and social isolation) on individual health was estimated in each of eight former Soviet republics using instrumental variables to overcome methodological hazards such as endogeneity and reverse causality. Interactions with institutional variables (voice and accountability, effectiveness of the legal system, informal economy) and social protection variables (employment protection, old age and disability benefits, sickness and health benefits) were examined. Results Most social capital indicators, in most countries, are associated with better health but the magnitude and significance of the impact differ between countries. Some of this variation can be explained by interacting social capital indicators with measures of institutional quality, with membership of organisations bringing greater benefit for health in countries where civil liberties are stronger, whereas social isolation has more adverse consequences where there is a large informal economy. A lesser amount is explained by the interaction of social capital indicators with selected measures of social protection. Conclusion When considering interventions to improve social capital as a means of improving population health, it seems advisable to take into account the influence of macrocontextual variables, in order not to overstate or understate the likely impact of the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Previous research has identified the role of social capital in explaining variations in health in the countries of the former Soviet Union. This study explores whether the benefits of social capital vary among these countries and why. Methods The impact of micro social capital (trust, membership and social isolation) on individual health was estimated in each of eight former Soviet republics using instrumental variables to overcome methodological hazards such as endogeneity and reverse causality. Interactions with institutional variables (voice and accountability, effectiveness of the legal system, informal economy) and social protection variables (employment protection, old age and disability benefits, sickness and health benefits) were examined. Results Most social capital indicators, in most countries, are associated with better health but the magnitude and significance of the impact differ between countries. Some of this variation can be explained by interacting social capital indicators with measures of institutional quality, with membership of organisations bringing greater benefit for health in countries where civil liberties are stronger, whereas social isolation has more adverse consequences where there is a large informal economy. A lesser amount is explained by the interaction of social capital indicators with selected measures of social protection. Conclusion When considering interventions to improve social capital as a means of improving population health, it seems advisable to take into account the influence of macrocontextual variables, in order not to overstate or understate the likely impact of the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Increasingly, loneliness is being recognised as a serious problem with detrimental effects on health, as well as on social cohesion and community trust. To effectively tackle this complex issue, a clear understanding of the phenomenon and its main drivers is needed. Over years of scientific research on loneliness, many potential risk factors have emerged and been tested empirically. This narrative review of 109 studies provides a concise summary of empirical evidence on the main potential risk factors for loneliness and presents an additional section dedicated to the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the very large number of existing studies, emphasis is placed on recent meta-analyses and systematic literature reviews as well as longitudinal studies. Similarly, given the large number of possible risk factors for loneliness, which may differ based on the geographical and cultural context, this review focuses on studies from Europe and North America. The results show that demographic factors often correlate with loneliness, but in many cases the link becomes negligible when controlling for other factors. Often, physical and mental health problems are found to be associated with loneliness, and so are some psychological factors, such as neuroticism or extroversion. Loneliness also depends on the environment in which one lives, and possibly the broader socio-economic and socio-cultural contexts. Nevertheless, the review shows that ultimately everything comes down to the quantity and quality of social relationships. In particular, marital status, living arrangements and the characteristics of one's personal social network are quite consistently found to be among the strongest predictors of loneliness. These main findings about the risk factors for loneliness remained valid also during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings of this review have implications for policy, as understanding who the most vulnerable groups are is key for designing targeted policy solutions that tackle loneliness. • A review of over one hundred articles examining risk factors for loneliness • Socio-demographic factors have mostly indirect links to loneliness • Social network characteristics and partner status matter the most for loneliness • Many risk factors for loneliness are interrelated and impact each other • Risk factors for loneliness remained roughly the same during the COVID-19 pandemic [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]