去大城市就业是否可以带来更高的教育回报?

The Impact of City Size on the Rate of Return to Education

近年来,以西安、武汉为代表的省会城市相继出台了吸引人才落户的政策。然而北京和上海两个超大型城市却不断提高落户条件,以控制人口规模。为了更好地研究人才流动策略,我们分析了2002年和2012年城市规模对教育回报率的影响。结果显示随时间推进,城市规模对于教育回报率的作用明显增强。在2012年,城市人口每增加1%,劳动力的教育回报率平均增加1.15%-1.21%;而城市GDP每增加1%,教育回报率会增加约1.07%-1.14%。通过工具变量校正内生性偏差的结果显示,城市人口每增加1%,教育回报率会增加4.84%-5.14%;城市GDP每增加1%,教育回报率会增加约2.80%-2.97%。此外,城市规模对于不同性别、不同受教育程度和不同年龄群体的教育回报率的影响是不同的。对于30-40岁间大专以上学历的女性教育回报率的影响最大。而当考虑由物价水平调整的实际收入时,城市规模对教育回报率的正向影响作用减弱,当考虑由房价水平调整的实际收入时,城市规模对教育回报率的影响由正转负。

In recent years,the capital cities represented by Xi’an and Wuhan have successively introduced policies to attract talents to settle down.However,the two super-large cities-Beijing and Shanghai have continuously improved their settlement conditions to control the population size.To better study the talent mobility strategy,we analyzed the impact of urban size on education returns in 2002 and 2012.The results show that the effect of city size on the rate of return on education has increased significantly over time.In 2012,for every 1%increase in urban population,the labor return on education increased by an average of 1.15%-1.21%;and for every 1%increase in urban GDP,the return on education would increase by about 1.07%-1.14%.The results of correction of endogenous deviations by instrumental variables show that for every 1%increase in urban population,the rate of return on education will increase by 4.84%-5.14%;for every 1%increase in urban GDP,the rate of return to education will increase by about 2.80%-2.97%.In addition,the size of the city has different effects on the educational returns of different genders,different levels of education and different age groups.For women aged 30-40,college education or above has the greatest impact on the rate of return to education.When considering the actual income adjusted by the price level,the positive impact of the city scale on the rate of return to education is weakened.When considering the actual income adjusted by the house price level,the impact of the city size on the rate of return to education is negative.