Search

A belief that a better-trained workforce will enhance employability of workers at the individual level and thus reduce unemployment at the agregate level is commonly held. Nevertheless, in spite of massive public resources devoted to the education sector in developing countries, unemployment rates still strongly hit the most educated populations. This article develops a simple and tractable neoclassical model that shows how unemployment and human capital investment are related to each other. It also compares the consequences on employment of two pro-employment policies, namely, subsidizing education by taxing wage versus subsidizing wage by taxing education. The results suggest, contrary to the common belief, a negative relation between employment rate and human capital investment and show that education should be taxed rather than subsidized.

Le but de cet article est de montrer que le mecanisme de selection naturelle des firmes peut entraver la croissance de la productivite agregee de l’economie, et ce, contrairement aux resultats suggeres par la litterature theorique existante. Cette derniere considere que le mecanisme de selection des firmes se base sur les niveaux de productivite de celles-ci. Nous supposons, dans cet article, que les firmes sont heterogenes par non seulement leurs niveaux de productivite mais aussi par leurs couts fixes. En outre, en tenant compte d’une possible perte d’experience pour les firmes inactives, notre etude met clairement en avant un effet negatif de la sortie des firmes, et par la d’une baisse des subventions accordees a celles-ci, sur la croissance de la productivite agregee tant a court qu’a long terme.Classification JEL : L1, O3, O4.

The paper aims to explicitly determine the distribution of human capital across hierarchic educational stages along the transition process, and to analyse the determinants of its evolution. We apply optimal control principles in a model of endogenous growth with two successive stages of education. We show that with initial relative scarcity of advanced human capital, the duration of studies at the advanced level should increase until reaching its equilibrium level. We also find that, by raising the duration of studies at the advanced schooling level, improvements in the quality of education at this level also enhances the economy’s growth rate, both in the transition and in the long-run.

In this paper, we provide a theoretical framework combining both the theory of adoption and industry evolution to explore the different sources of industry efficiency growth. The objective is to investigate which of the explanatory variables can explain inefficiency. The theoretical and simulation results of this study show that the inter-firms efficiency variance exerts a substantial impact on industry efficiency. Productivity change within individual plant (via adoption and learning) is a major source of efficiency growth in the industry. Exit usually improves aggregate efficiency as less efficient plants leave industries. The impact of entry is less clear since it depends on the efficiency levels of entrants. Finally, the role of competition in generating economic efficiency is strongly confirmed. Our theoretical findings confirm and extend others in the empirical studies.

This paper develops and analyses a dynamic model, which combines both the adoption and the industry evolution theories. We model the decision of adoption, learning entry and exit of firms. These decisions depend on the interaction of technology characteristics ((effectiveness, machinery and information costs…) and other economic indicators (firm’s size, technology capability, competition concentration, returns of scale,…). We use the model’s theoretical results to analyze simultaneously the effects on the structure and the average efficiency of the industry and to develop a framework for understanding the effect of competitive policy reform and public policy action necessary to enhance adoption and average productivity. The model we suggest also analyses effects on industry evolution and social welfare.