Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the "other 99 percent"

Science

Volumn 344, Issue 6186, 2014, Pages 843-851

  Autor, David H ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC POLICY; EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; INDUSTRIALIZATION; SKILLED LABOR; SOCIAL POLICY; SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS; WAGE;

COGNITION; COST; EDUCATION; GRADUATE; HUMAN RIGHTS; INCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SALARY; SKILL; SOCIOECONOMICS; ECONOMICS; EMPLOYMENT; FAMILY SIZE; HUMAN; MARKETING; SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFIT; SCHOOL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS; VOCATIONAL EDUCATION;

EDUCATION, PROFESSIONAL; EMPLOYMENT; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; HUMANS; INCOME; MARKETING; SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS; SCHOOLS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 84901236364     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1251868     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. C. D. Goldin, L. F. Katz, Brookings Pap. Econ. Act. (fall), 135 (2007).
2. Goldin and Katz (1) found that the increase in the education wage premium, particularly the college premium, explains about 60 to 70% of the rise in wage inequality (variance) between 1980 and 2005.
3. F. Alvaredo et al., J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 3-20 (2013).
4. J. Bivens, L. Mishel, J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 57-78 (2013).
5. A. Bonica et al., J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 103-124 (2013).
6. S. N. Kaplan, J. Rauh, J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 35-56 (2013).
7. D. Autor et al., The Contribution of the Minimum Wage to U.S. Wage Inequality over Three Decades: A Reassessment (NBER Working Paper 16533, Cambridge, MA, 2010).
8. T. Piketty, E. Saez, Q. J. Econ. 118, 1-41 (2003).
9. These calculations use data from (8), with data updated to 2012 available at http://elsa.berkeley.edu/saez/~Tab-Fig.2012prel.xls. Average U.S. household incomes, including the top 1%, rose by 20.2%, while the average household income of the bottom 99% of households rose by only 3.5%.
10. Thus, the top 1% maintains its share of household income at a constant 10.0% while average household incomes rise by 20.2%, as actually occurred.
11. This point is due to Lawrence Katz of Harvard University, who offers these calculations in his graduate labor economics lecture notes.
12. T. Lemieux, Post-Secondary Education and Increasing Wage Inequality (Working Paper 12077, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2006).
13. S. Firpo et al., Decomposition methods in economics. In Handbook of Labor Economics, D. Card, O. Ashenfelter, Eds. (Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam, 2011), vol. 4, pp. 1-102.
14. See www.oecd.org/site/piaac/surveyofadultskills.htm for more information. The PIAAC program will encompass 33 countries, but data for only 22 were available at this writing.
15. E. A. Hanushek, G. Schwerdt, S. Wiederhold, L. Woessmann, Returns to Skills Around the World: Evidence from PIAAC (NBER Working Paper 19762, Cambridge, MA, 2013).
16. Hanushek et al. (15) also found that the correlation between numeracy skills and years of schooling is 0.45. When including both numeracy skills and years of schooling in an earnings regression, they found that both are substantial and significant predictors of earnings, although each is attenuated relative to a model where only one factor is included at a time. This pattern of results suggests, logically, that neither test scores nor years of schooling is a complete measure of labor market skills.
17. T. D. Snyder, 120 Years of American Education: A Statistical Portrait (National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, 1993).
18. L. D. Johnston, "History lessons: Understanding the decline in manufacturing." MinnPost, 22 February 2012; www.minnpost.com/macro-micro- minnesota/2012/02/history-lessons-understanding-decline-manufacturing.
19. C. Goldin, L. F. Katz, The Race Between Education and Technology (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 2008).
20. M. Stanley, Q. J. Econ. 118, 671-708 (2003).
21. B. Pierce, in Labor in the New Economy, K. G. Abraham, J. R. Spletzer, M. Harper, Eds. (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2010), pp. 63-98.
22. These comparisons hold labor market experience and gender constant. This doubling of the college premium very likely understates the magnitude of the increase in inequality between college-educated and non-college-educated workers. Alongside higher hourly earnings, college-educated workers enjoy greater job stability, lower rates of unemployment, more generous fringe benefits, and better working conditions; Pierce (21) found that these differentials have generally increased in the same time period.
23. D. H. Autor et al., Q. J. Econ. 118, 1279-1333 (2003).
24. D. Acemoglu, D. H. Autor, Skills, tasks and technologies: Implications for employment and earnings. In Handbook of Labor Economics, D. Card, O. Ashenfelter, Eds. (Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam, 2011), vol. 4, pp. 1043-1171.
25. D. H. Autor, D. Dorn, Am. Econ. Rev. 103, 1553- 1597 (2013).
26. M. Goos et al., www.aeaweb.org/forthcoming/output/accepted-AER.php
27. Extensive recent literature, commencing with Autor et al. (23) and summarized in Acemoglu and Autor (24), considers the role of technological change in displacing workers performing routine tasks and complementing workers performing nonroutine tasks. An additional implication of this framework is that an increasing share of employment will be found in comparatively low-skill nonroutine manual tasks that require situational adaptability, visual and language recognition, and in-person interactions but limited formal education (e.g., janitors and cleaners, home health aides, construction laborers, and security personnel). See Autor and Dorn (25) and Goos et al. (26) for evidence that employment in the U.S. and among OECD member countries has increasingly polarized into high-paid, abstract-intensive occupations and low-paid, manual-intensive occupations.
28. J. Tinbergen, Kyklos 27, 217-226 (1974).
29. Details of this model are given in the online supplement.
30. D. Card, T. Lemieux, Am. Econ. Rev. 91, 97-102 (2001).
31. L. F. Katz, K. M. Murphy, Q. J. Econ. 107, 35-78 (1992).
32. L. Katz, D. H. Autor, Changes in the wage structure and earnings inequality. In Handbook of Labor Economics, D. Card, O. Ashenfelter, Eds. (Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam, 1999), vol. 3, pp. 1463-1555.
33. D. Card, T. Lemieux, Q. J. Econ. 116, 705-746 (2001).
34. D. H. Autor et al., Rev. Econ. Stat. 90, 300-323 (2008).
35. E. Crivellaro, "College wage premium over time: Trends in Europe in the last 15 years." University Ca' Foscari of Venice, Department of Economics Research Paper Series no. 03/WP/2014 (2014); http://dx.doi.org/10. 2139/ssrn.2383795.
36. Summarizing evidence on the college premium in 12 European countries between 1994 and 1999, Crivellaro (35) found a pattern of increasing skill differentials except in countries that have had a large increase in the relative supply of college graduates, a pattern consistent with the conceptual model laid out below.
37. Although this deceleration is not evident from Fig. 3, it is detected by the regression equation, as discussed in the online supplement.
38. College Board, Trends in Student Aid: 2013 (College Board, New York, 2013).
39. C. Avery, S. Turner, J. Econ. Perspect. 26, 165-192 (2012).
40. Three sources of uncertainty should be kept in mind when interpreting these estimates. First, they encompass substantial heterogeneity. Although the average college graduate earns substantially more than the average high school graduate, the least successful college graduates may earn substantially less than the median among high school graduates, and the most successful high school graduates may earn substantially more than the median among college graduates. Second, for students who acquire substantial student debt but do not complete the college degree, it is far from certain that college will prove a good investment. Finally, these calculations assume that the lifetime profile of earnings observed in the year of college graduation will persist throughout the career. As Fig. 3 indicates, this premium has changed substantially over time, so this assumption is only a rough approximation. However, the college premium is so high at present that even with a substantial decline, college would remain an attractive financial proposition on average from a lifetime earnings perspective.
41. R. J. Murnane, J. Econ. Lit. 51, 370-422 (2013).
42. D. Acemoglu, J. Robinson, Why Nations Fail (Crown, New York, 2012).
43. As with cross-sectional inequality, there is no economically "ideal" level of intergenerational mobility. Even in a society with perfect equality of opportunity, one would expect children of successful parents to have above-average success as adults, simply because many attributes that contribute to success (appearance, intellect, athleticism) are partly heritable.
44. M. Corak, J. Econ. Perspect. 27, 79-102 (2013).
45. S. F. Reardon, The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children's Life Chances, G. J. Duncan, R. J. Murnane, Eds. (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 2011), pp. 91-115.
46. R. Chetty et al., Is the United States Still a Land of Opportunity? Recent Trends in Intergenerational Mobility (NBER Working Paper No. 19844, Cambridge, MA, 2014).
47. C.-I. Lee, G. Solon, Rev. Econ. Stat. 91, 766-772 (2009).
48. Between 2002-2003 and 2012-2013, the sum of federal Pell Grants and loans for higher education increased by 105%, from $83 billion to $170 billion in constant 2012 dollars [(38), table 1].
49. C.-T. Hsieh et al., The Allocation of Talent and U.S. Economic Growth (NBER Working Paper No. 18693, Cambridge, MA, 2013).
50. D. H. Autor et al., Am. Econ. Rev. 103, 2121-2168 (2013).
51. D. Card et al., J. Labor Res. 25, 519-559 (2004).
52. B. T. Hirsch, J. Econ. Perspect. 22, 153-176 (2008).
53. A. S. Goldberger, Economica 46, 327 (1979).
54. The extensive involvement of state and federal government in education at all levels also underscores the fact that the distribution of education and skills today is in no sense a "free market" outcome; it is a consequence of both individual and public choices.