Skip to main content

Education, Human Capital Spillovers and Productivity: Evidence from Swedish Firm Level Production Functions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 586 Accesses

Abstract

David Audretsch has made significant contributions to our understanding of the role of knowledge spillovers for innovations and growth. This paper follows this line of research in examining the link between education, human capital spillovers and productivity. Human capital spillovers arise when the presence of individuals with high levels of human capital makes other workers more productive. If higher education is associated with human capital spillovers, a social return to education is generated. We use firm-level production functions to estimate the social returns to higher education in Sweden. The data include more than 50,000 Swedish firms and cover the period from 2001 to 2010. This was a period when Sweden experienced a rapid regional expansion of higher education, and the share of Swedish workforce with higher education has increased dramatically over the past decades. We find economically significant spillover effects from highly educated workers and that a 1 % increase in the share of educated workers is associated with a 0.4–1.0% increase in productivity. When controlling for university-based R&D and business services, the spillover effect is significantly reduced. We also find an economically significant decline in the spillover effect over the 10 year period. According to our estimations, the spillover is positive at the beginning of the period and gradually diminishes by the end of the period, such that we no longer find any significant spillover effect. We interpret this as marginally diminishing social returns to education. The results have policy implications for higher education (We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg foundation and the Kamprad family foundation. We also grateful for the valuable comments provided by Pontus Braunerhjelm, Gunnar Eliasson and Hulya Ulku. Peter S. Karlsson has provided valuable statistical assistance).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The time period is also characterized by a boom in the economy that ended in the last half of 2008, with a share recession in 2009. This has influenced our choice of stochastic frontier model and not using a regular panel model.

  2. 2.

    There are a large number of agglomeration studies that look at spatial concentration and its economic effects on productivity. The core idea is that agglomerations of production factors (people or human capital) enhance productivity. For evidence using the estimates of productivity effects, see Ciccone and Hall (1996), Henderson (2003) and Moretti (2004a).

  3. 3.

    Acemoglu (1996) argue that the existing evidence on socially increasing returns on human capital may be interpreted as social increasing return on capital accumulation. It is beyond the scope of this paper to distinguish between the two effects. See Moretti (2004a) for a discussion.

  4. 4.

    Morreti’s (2004a) estimates are robust to different assumptions of technology, omitted variables and various other specifications.

  5. 5.

    Further decomposition is possible; however, this drastically reduces the sample. For empirical reasons, we therefore abstain from further decomposition.

  6. 6.

    Depending on the analysis, we use either SIC at either the 2 or 3 digit level. When necessary, to economize on the degrees of freedom, we use the SIC2 digit.

  7. 7.

    Adding this constraint does not significantly alter the results. We therefore only report results without constraints on the coefficients. For further results see appendix.

  8. 8.

    Most R&D reported is conducted at a relatively small number of large firms, and of these investments, about 75% takes place in one of the three largest regions in Sweden (Stockholm, Malmö and Gothenburg). These three regions also have significantly higher shares of the educated workforce compared to the rest of Sweden.

References

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillover and the geography if innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (2004). Knowledge spillover and the geography of innovation. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, 4, 2713–2739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1992). Real effects of academic research: Comment. American Economic Review, 82(1), 363–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D. (1996). A micro foundation for social increasing returns in human capital accumulation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111(3), 779–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D., & Angrist, J. (2000). How large are human capital externalities? Evidence from compulsory schooling laws. In B. S. Bernanke & K. Rogoff (Eds.), NBER macroeconomic annual (Vol. 15, pp. 9–59). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R., Quigley, J. M., & Wilhelmson, M. (2004). University decentralization as regional policy: The Swedish experiment. Journal of Economic Geography, 4, 371–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R. (1991). Economic growth in a cross section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 61, 363–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib, J., & Spiegel, M. M. (1994). The role of human capital in economics development: Evidence from cross-country data. Journal of Monetary Economics, 28, 143–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati, J., & Rodriguez, C. A. (1975). Welfare-theoretical analyses of the brain-drain. Journal of Development Economics, 2, 195–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borjas, G. J., Bronars, S. G. & Trejo, S. J. (1992). Self-selection and internal migration in the United States. NBER Working Paper, No. 4002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciccone, A., & Hall, R. (1996). Productivity and the density of economic activity. American Economic Review, 86(1), 54–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciccone, A., & Peri, G. (2002). Identifying human capital externalities: Theory with an application to US cities. IZA Working paper, No. 488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eklund, J. E., & Petersson, L. (2019). Tertiary education, productivity and economic growth: Evidence from Sweden. Swedish Entrepreneurship Forum, Working paper, No. 2019: 58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. (1994). Knowledge complementarity and innovation. Small Business Economics, 6(5), 363–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. L., Kallal, D. H., Scheinkman, J., & Shleifer, A. (1992). Growth in cities. Journal of Political Economy, 100, 1126–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasear, E. (1999). Learning in cities. Journal of Urban Economics, 46(2), 254–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, V. (2003). The urbanization process and economic growth: The so-what question. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(1), 47–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (1970). The economy of cities. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovanovic, B., & Rob, R. (1989). The growth and diffusion of knowledge. Review of Economic Studies, 56(4), 569–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1988). On the mechanism of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mankiw, G., Romer, D., & Weil, D. N. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 407–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. (1890). Principles of economics. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moretti, E. (2004a). Workers’ education, spillovers, and Productivity: Evidence from plant-level production functions. American Economic Review, 94(3), 656–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moretti, E. (2004b). Estimating the social returns to higher education: Evidence from longitudinal data and repeated cross-sectional data. Journal of Economctrics, 121, 175–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Phelps, E. S. (1966). Investment in humans, technological diffusion, and economic growth. The American Economic Review, 56, 69–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauch, J. (1993). Productivity gains from geographic concentration of human capital: Evidence from the cities. Journal of Urban Economics, 34(3), 380–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71–102.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johan E. Eklund .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix 1

Translog production function

We also estimate following translog production function:

$$ \ln Y=A+{\sum}_i^n{\beta}_i\ \ln {\mathrm{X}}_i+\frac{1}{2}{\sum}_i^n{\sum}_j^n{\beta}_{ij}\ \ln {X}_i\ln {X}_j $$

Where Xi denotes production factors. The total factor productivity, A, is modeled as in the Cobb-Douglas case, and we include the same effects as above. The translog model is estimated under the standard assumptions: ∑i β i = 1 and ∑i β ij = ∑j β ji = 0.

Table A1 Translog function with spillovers in local labor markets
Table A2 Translog function with spillovers at the county level

Appendix 2

As a robustness check, we estimate the spillover effects at county level. There are 290 counties in Sweden, compared to 72 local labor market regions.

Table B1 Cross-sectional estimates for human capital spillovers at the county level

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Eklund, J.E., Pettersson, L. (2019). Education, Human Capital Spillovers and Productivity: Evidence from Swedish Firm Level Production Functions. In: Lehmann, E., Keilbach, M. (eds) From Industrial Organization to Entrepreneurship. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25237-3_20

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics