Multidimensional Human Capital and the Wage Structure / David J. Deming.

By:

Deming, David J

Contributor(s):

National Bureau of Economic Research

Material type: Text

TextSeries: Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ; no. w31001.Publication details: Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 2023.Description: 1 online resource: illustrations (black and white)Subject(s):

Other classification:

Online resources:

Available additional physical forms:

Hardcopy version available to institutional subscribers

Abstract: This paper reviews and synthesizes the literature on the macroeconomic implications of human capital theory. I begin with a review of the canonical model of education and the wage structure pioneered by Tinbergen (1975) and developed more fully by Goldin and Katz (2007). I also review innovations such as the task framework developed by Acemoglu and Autor (2011). The canonical model does a surprisingly good job of predicting changes in the wage structure in the U.S. and other developed countries over the last half-century. Relative to the canonical model, the task framework adopts a more flexible view of technology and does a better job of fitting non-monotonic changes in the wage structure. Yet the task framework does not fully explain why educated workers have done so well since 1980, nor does it explain other recent facts such as flattening returns to cognitive skills and growing returns to non-cognitive, "higher-order" skills such as teamwork. To understand these recent trends, we must move beyond a single index view of human capital, toward richer, multi-dimensional frameworks. I conclude with a discussion of the nascent literature on the implications of multi-dimensional human capital for the wage structure, which raises more questions than it answers.

Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.

Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

Holdings
Item type	Home library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode	Item holds
Working Paper	Biblioteca Digital	Colección NBER	nber w31001 (Browse shelf(Opens below))	Not For Loan

Total holds: 0

Collection: Colección NBER Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)

Previous	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	Next
Previous	nber w30999 When we change the clock, does the clock change us? /	nber w3100 The McKibbin-Sachs Global Model: Theory and Specifications /	nber w31000 Human Capital and Climate Change /	nber w31001 Multidimensional Human Capital and the Wage Structure /	nber w31002 Competitive Model Selection in Algorithmic Targeting /	nber w31003 Asymmetries in Federal Reserve Objectives /	nber w31004 The Global Dollar Cycle /	Next

March 2023.

This paper reviews and synthesizes the literature on the macroeconomic implications of human capital theory. I begin with a review of the canonical model of education and the wage structure pioneered by Tinbergen (1975) and developed more fully by Goldin and Katz (2007). I also review innovations such as the task framework developed by Acemoglu and Autor (2011). The canonical model does a surprisingly good job of predicting changes in the wage structure in the U.S. and other developed countries over the last half-century. Relative to the canonical model, the task framework adopts a more flexible view of technology and does a better job of fitting non-monotonic changes in the wage structure. Yet the task framework does not fully explain why educated workers have done so well since 1980, nor does it explain other recent facts such as flattening returns to cognitive skills and growing returns to non-cognitive, "higher-order" skills such as teamwork. To understand these recent trends, we must move beyond a single index view of human capital, toward richer, multi-dimensional frameworks. I conclude with a discussion of the nascent literature on the implications of multi-dimensional human capital for the wage structure, which raises more questions than it answers.