Inhaltsverzeichnis

 

Abbildungsverzeichnis

 

Tabellenverzeichnis

 

1. Einleitung ／ Introduction  

    1.1. Hintergrund der Forschung/Arbeit ／background

    1.2. Forschungsproblem und Bedeutung / problem and significance

           (Einfluss des HKs auf des Wirtschaftswachstum) 

(注意文章的核心是要寫人力資本對于經濟發展的意義）

    1.3. Struktur der Arbeit und Methoden /structrue and methods

2. Review der Wachstumstheorie und Humankapitaltheorie 

    (Review the economic development theory and human capital theory) 

    2.1. Überblick über die Wachstumstheorie

           ( overview of the economic development theory）   

         （經濟發展理論梗概）

          （這里簡單介紹經濟發展理論，簡介發展理論的三個階段：古典，新古典到新發展理論（既內生發展理論））但是都是非常簡單的介紹。

 

經濟學者對這一時期的財富分配問題進行了研究，并對一國財富的增長很少關注。這時，只有色諾芬認識到專業化、分工、人口規模和市場化對勞動生產率的提高。這些思想對未來幾代人的成長理論有一定的影響。

生長的思想在資本主義生產方式的初期產生重商主義是最早系統增長思想史。增長的重商主義思想的違約是由于其財富觀和國民財富增長模式的角度的片面性。這樣的只注重農業生產的重農主義。戴維和休姆威廉的成長思想比較科學。首先認識到分工對勞動生產率的提高有積極作用，并進一步認識到這是經濟增長的源泉。休姆意識到，生產力的提高主要是由于比較優勢的發展，這一思想是亞當史密斯之前。

在批判重商主義和重農主義的基礎上，古典經濟學家對經濟增長問題進行了比較深入的研究在繼承傳統的經濟增長思想的瑣碎和其他學者。古典學派形成較為科學、系統的對經濟增長和在古典經濟增長理論的這段時間的思考，他對經濟增長理論作出了巨大貢獻的經濟學家亞當斯密、戴維李嘉圖、喬治弗里德里希和卡爾海因里希馬克思的名單。他們被認為是現代增長理論的杰出先驅。Western economic growth thought can be traced back to the era of Western Europe slavery and feudal farm economy. This period was mainly self-sufficient natural economy, the growth of the nation's wealth primarily depended on wartime looting. Economic scholars of this time mainly studied the distribution of wealth and paid little attention to the growth of a country's wealth. At this time, only Xenophon recognized the effects of specialization, division of labor, population scale and market on the improvement of labor productivity. These ideas have some influences on the growth theory of future generations. #p#分頁標題#e#

The growth thoughts of mercantilism produced in the initial stage of capitalist production mode and were the earliest systematic growth thoughts in history. The defaults of the mercantilism growth thoughts are due to its one-sidedness in the view of wealth and in the point of national wealth growth mode. So did the physiocracy which only paid attention to the agricultural production. And the growth thoughts of William Petty and David Hume are relatively scientific. Petty was the first one who recognized that the division of labor had a positive effect to the improvement of labor productivity, and further realized that this is the source of economic growth.  Hume realized that the increasing of productivity was mainly due to the development of comparative advantages and this thought was prior to Adam Smith.

On the basis of criticizing the mercantilism and physiocracy, classical economists conducted relatively thorough studies on the issue of economic growth by inheriting the traditional economic growth thoughts of Petty and other scholars. The classical school formed a more scientific and systematic thinking on economic growth and in this time of classical growth theory, the economists who made a great contribution to the economic growth theory are Adam Smith, David Ricardo, George Friedrich List and Karl Heinrich Marx. They were considered as the outstanding precursors of the modern theory of the growth.

In The Wealth of Nations, Smith took the issue of economic growth as the main line, and put forward the consistent dynamic equilibrium model. According to the historical facts, Smith proved the point of richness deriving from the division. Adam Smith also put forward two main ways to increase the per capita national income, one is to improve the productivity of the workers, the other is to improve the proportion of the productive laborers.  On the basis of above points, he stressed the positive significance of labor division to the improvement of labor productivity, as well as the effects of capital accumulation to the increasing of the number of productive laborers.

Although Ricardo ignored the existence of the constant capital, mistakenly thought that all the accumulation of capital would be totally invested into labor wages, namely the variable capital, but he still pointed out the main measure to increase profits or promote economic growth was to improve the labor productivity, shorten the necessary labor time and lower wages.

List correctly realized that the economic growth of a country should pay more attention to the long-term interests. He thought that the paths of economic growth for developed and less developed countries were different. Poor countries should sacrifice some immediate trade interests, firstly make the productivity of domestic important infant industries to reach the level of developed countries by relying on the trade protection policy, and then participate in the competition of the international market. After the domestic infant industry developed, the loss of the less developed countries will be compensated, and this method can increase the national wealth in the long run.#p#分頁標題#e#

Marx inherited the tradition of British classical economics which paid much attention to the research of national wealth growth process. He clarified the rule and general trend of capital accumulation, revealed the conditions which the capitalist reproduction on extended scale should satisfy. He thought that the expanded reproduction can be done by two basic ways. One is to increase the accumulation, namely increase the volume of the factors of production. Another is to improve the efficiency of the use of factors of productions, namely improve the output of factors of production. From the perspective of overall social economy, Marx emphasized that it’s necessary to maintain the dynamic balance of all departments in order to make the expanded reproduction of the whole society go smoothly. For this purpose, Marx put forward the famous social reproduction formula based on the idea of dividing total social products into means of production and means of consumption. In Marx's economics research, he early mentioned the influence of technological progress on economic growth, he discussed the conditions where capacity expansion can be independent of the increase of capital amount in Das Kapital .

In 50~ 60s of the 20th century, many developing countries followed the classical development theory and the dual economic theory, and this led these countries’ economic development facing many problems, such as the neglecting of agriculture development caused the stagnation of the rural economy. This caused the new classical school of theory recovered in the field of economics development and its representative figure is Theodore William Schultz. In 1964, Schulz published a book named Transforming Traditional Agriculture. In this book, the basic economic problems of developing countries are analyzed in detail. Schulz rejected the traditional thinking that agriculture was full of backwardness and farmers were conservative, and he emphasized the effects of price, incentives and human capital. Neoclassical theory of economic development also accepted some propositions of neoclassical growth theory, such as economic growth is gradual and continuous, rather than salutatory. And technological progress can prevent the law of diminishing returns to work, and the increasing of capital accumulation is likely to increase the wage rates. 

The origin of the Neoclassical economic development theory is the western orthodox economics, which includes classical economics, the marginal utility theory of Austrian school, the microeconomics which was epitomized by Marshall as well as the theory of James Edward Meade who composited the contemporary economic theory. Neoclassical theory of development is close with Smith and Ricardo’ theory of classical, but they still have their differences. They all advocated free competition, free trade and economic laissez-faire. The difference is that Smith paid attention to the “national wealth” (the gross national product), Ricardo focused on the distribution of income and the focus of the modern neoclassical economics lies in the efficient allocation of resources, and generally ignored the social and political factors.   #p#分頁標題#e#

The thinking of endogenous development began to occur in the late 70s of 20th century, it is one of the strategic thoughts about the developing country's economic and social development. The starting point of endogenous development mainly highlights the endogenous character of development, and thus is in contrary to the development way of negative imitation or introduction. The endogenous development theory is not constructed by an original thinker, but start from the deep reflection on the development practice and traditional development theory of developing countries.

From the point of development practice, the lessons are that developing countries counter repeated setbacks on the road of development. As a result, they are severely limited by the western developed countries. Because of the eager to pursue modernization, and the exemplary role of developed countries, developing countries consciously or unconsciously take developed countries as the goal, as a result, developing countries have heavy reliance on the developed country's economy and culture. For example, in order to obtain the rapid economic growth, many Latin American countries rippled to increase domestic investment at all costs, and results in the “liabilities of the 80s” which accumulated high foreign debt . This type of development caused serious problems on all aspects of social life, such as the social difference between rich and poor has not improved, but increased gradually. Latin American countries just got rid of the political colonial rule, but again fell into the new economic colonial rule, and pure economic development resulted in serious imbalances in social economy, politics, culture, education and other aspects.

It is under this social background that the theory of endogenous development arose. In August 1979, the UNESCO in Quito called 18 experts from many countries and representatives of Latin America academy of social sciences and the international center for research on senior Latin American news to specially discuss and analyzed the new development theory and its practices. As a result of this seminar, UNESCO commissioned famous French economist, emeritus professor of the college De France François Perroux specially wrote a book which from the philosophical height to expound this problem, this book was published later named as A New Concept of Development: Basic Tenets.

The basic idea of the new development theory is to transfer from centered on economic development concept to the development of people-centered concept. Adapting to the transformation, development is endogenous, overall and comprehensive. According to Perroux’s point of view, the so-called endogenous development is to fully and correctly rely on and use one’s own strength and resources to seek development. It is on the basis of self-reliance, especially on the identification and utilization of potential human resources, and then strengthen international exchanges and cooperation based on above key points .#p#分頁標題#e#

From the contents of endogenous development, it is necessary for developing countries to find effective ways for strengthening its economic abilities, build capacity for development, and become stronger and more competitive in this era. Due to the shortages and ineffective use of resources, such as finance, social capital, natural resources, and human resources constitute difficult challenges to local actors in improving their peoples’ living standards and quality of life. Limited local resources and lack of knowledge in utilizing those are the major constraints of local development. With all problems that local areas are facing nowadays, it is essential to do research on how local actors can mobilize, utilize their local resources for development.

    2.2. Die Bedeutung des Begriffs “Humankapital” in der Wachstumstheorie

           Importance of Def. “Human Capital” in the Development Theory

           2.2.1. Keynesianische Wirtschaftstheorie (Sachliche Kapitalkummulation)

                     Keynesian economic theory 

                     (實物資本的累計）

Since the 20th century, new classical economics still emphasized the automatic regulation of capitalism and the consistency of personal interests and social interests, and this idea departure from the actual situation of the economy conditions of western countries. After the First World War, Britain fell into the predicament of economic crisis, and the 1929 world economic crisis was following. Facing this condition, the new classical economics itself was in crisis either because it cannot explain the coexistence of persistent unemployment and huge inflation existing in the capitalist world this is what Joan Robinson said “the first crisis” of the western economics. 

In 1926, John Maynard Keynes published an essay named The End of Laissez-faire. In this essay, he argued that a country’s economic activity should stipulate which must be managed by the government, which must belong to the individual self-determination. The idea showed that Keynes didn’t wants to damage the interests of the private enterprise. He affirmed that the government should not ask what the individual has been going on and turned out to be a success, what the government should ask was those beyond the limits of individual activities. Keynes later published the book of The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money in 1936. This book showed that he tended to the idea of the economy should be regulated by the state and attempted to solve the internal contradictions of capitalism through the power of the government. This idea met the requirements of the economic innovation in this era, therefore, after the end of world war II, the Keynesianism became the mainstream of western economics, laid the solid foundation for the birth and development of unbalanced growth theory of regional economy.#p#分頁標題#e#

The principle of deficiency of effective demand is perhaps the most important proposition put forward by Keynes. It was pointed out that Keynes explained that drastic decline in GNP and increase in involuntary unemployment that occurred during the period of depression was due to deficiency of aggregate demand caused by decrease in investment demand, but the problems of lack of economic growth, poverty and unemployment were due to entirely different reasons. Poverty and unemployment in developing countries, it was pointed out, was caused by more fundamental and structural factors such as lack of capital stock relative to labor force of these economies. Thus, Dr. A.K. Das Gupta wrote, “Indeed whatever be the generality of the General Theory may be in the sense in which the term ‘general’ was used by Keynes the applicability of the propositions of the General theory to conditions of an underdeveloped economy is at best limited” . Therefore, it was explained that Keynesian policy prescriptions to raise aggregate demand such as increase in Government expenditure by deficit financing cannot be adopted to accelerate the growth of income and employment.

It was emphasized that the nature of unemployment prevailing in the developing countries was different in that it was of the type of chronic disguised unemployment caused by deficiency of physical capital and lack of wage goods rather than decline in effective demand which was stressed by Keynes to be responsible for the rise in cyclical, involuntary and open unemployment. But it was emphasized by Dr. V.K.R.V. Rao that Keynesian policy prescription of deficit financing to overcome depression, if adopted in the developing countries to finance increase in investment expenditure by the Government was likely to generate inflationary pressures in the developing countries rather than increasing real income, output and employment. In fact, Dr. V.K.R.V. Rao, among others, contended that in the developing countries it was classical economics which laid stress on increasing the rate of saving for accelerating rate of growth of income and employment was applicable and relevant rather than Keynesian economics which emphasized deficiency of effective demand. Thus, Dr. Rao ends his article, already quoted, “It is the classical thesis which is operative for the other category (meaning, the underdeveloped countries) where you move from one level of development to a higher level of development.”  He adds further, “old-fashioned prescription of ‘work harder and save more still holds good as the medicine for economic progress, at any rate as far as the underdeveloped countries are concerned.”  While Dr. V.K.R.V. Rao, Dr. A.K. Das Gupta and their followers laid stress on classical policy prescription of rapid accumulation of physical capital to accelerate economic growth and generate employment opportunities, Professor, Vakil and Brahmananda emphasized the rapid expansion of wage goods (i.e. essential consumer goods of which most important are food-grains) as the remedy for accelerating growth and removing poverty and unemployment.#p#分頁標題#e#

One of the main representatives of Keynesianism James Tobin holds the view that money is an asset and is a means of circulation either. As an asset, it can be used for savings, so the total savings can increase in the monetary economy. But as a means of circulation, it must be held for people, so the part of the savings which are in the form of actual cash balance will not translate into investment. Because the actual cash balance has a trade-off relationship with physical capital, when the holdings of real money balances increase, the holdings of the physical capital will reduce. In order to solve this contradiction, Tobin proposed to change the form of wealth holding through monetary policy, so as to change the capital/output ratio. Tobin believed that real money balances can be substituted with physical capital. People’s demand for the two kinds of assets depends on the relative yield of them. When the inflation rate rises, the yield of real money balances will decline, and the yield of physical capital will rise. So, people will reduce the holdings of real money balances, and accordingly increase the physical capital holdings.  Obviously, Tobin’s claim is the traditional Keynesian way, namely to stimulate investment by inflation.

           2.2.2. Neoklassiche Wachstumstheorie (exogener technischer Fortschritt)

                     Neoclassical development theory

                     (技術進步作為外因）

    During the second half of nineteenth century, the world witnessed dramatic developments in technology. Rapid technical developments and inventions in different fields, as well as continued high growth rates and increasing real wages of workers have guaranteed and stabilized interest rate trend. These conditions brought new different perspectives on economic development and welfare in the international community that is different and in some cases opposite with traditional classical approaches. Neoclassic considered short-term period’s in income distribution, theory of surplus value and theory of general equilibrium. So from this view framework, economic   interactions between different parts in a certain period will be discussed and with economic development attitude, we focused on the optimal and efficient allocation of resources. From the neoclassical perspective, technology plays an important role in development and technological advances reduce costs and improve production methods that lead to rapid national income growth. Important feature of technological progress from neoclassical perspective is that it is capital intensive.

Neoclassical growth theory outlines how a steady economic growth rate will be accomplished with the proper amounts of the three driving forces: labor, capital and technology. The theory states that by varying the amounts of labor and capital in the production function, an equilibrium state can be accomplished. When a new technology becomes available, the labor and capital need to be adjusted to maintain growth equilibrium. The Neo-classical model was an extension to the Harrod-Domar model that included a new term, productivity growth. The most important contribution was probably the work done by Robert Solow. In 1956, Solow and T.W. Swan developed a relatively simple growth model which fit available data on US economic growth with some success. Solow extended the Harrod-Domar model by adding labor as a factor of production, requiring diminishing returns to labor and capital separately, and constant returns to scale for both factors combined, introducing a time-varying technology variable distinct from capital and labor. The capital-output and capital-labor ratios are not fixed as they are in the Harrod Domar model. These refinements allow increasing capital intensity to be distinguished from technological progress.#p#分頁標題#e#

In neoclassical growth models, the long-run rate of growth is exogenously determined, in other words, it is determined outside of the model. A common prediction of these models is that an economy will always converge towards a steady state rate of growth, which depends only on the rate of technological progress and the rate of labor force growth. The key assumption of the neoclassical growth model is that capital is subject to diminishing returns. Given a fixed stock of labor, the impact on output of the last unit of capital accumulated will always be less than the one before. Assuming for simplicity no technological progress or labor force growth, diminishing returns implies that at some point the amount of new capital produced is only just enough to make up for the amount of existing capital lost due to depreciation. At this point, because of the assumptions of no technological progress or labor force growth, the economy ceases to grow. Assuming non-zero rates of labor growth complicates matters somewhat, but the basic logic still applies - in the short-run the rate of growth slows as diminishing returns take effect and the economy converges to a constant “steady-state” rate of growth (that is, no economic growth per-capita). Including non-zero technological progress is very similar to the assumption of non-zero workforce growth, in terms of “effective labor”: a new steady state is reached with constant output per worker-hour required for a unit of output. However, in this case, per-capita output is growing at the rate of technological progress in the “steady-state” (that is, the rate of productivity growth) .

 Neoclassical models of economic growth that assumed that technological change was exogenously determined, leading to the pessimistic conclusion that government and market policies could do nothing to increase economic growth in the long term. An endogenous growth theory suggests that technological change is a response to economic incentives in the market that can be created and/or affected by government or private sector institutions. In addition, neoclassical models of growth could not answer some very basic economic questions, particularly about the differences in economic growth and the quality of life between developed and developing countries.  If technological change was indeed exogenous and freely available to everyone, then the only way that rich countries should have such dramatically higher standards of living is if poor countries have significantly less capital and a huge rate of return to additional investment. If that were the case, there should be massive flows of capital from rich countries to poor countries and an equalization of standards of living, but in fact, there is not.

           2.2.3. Die Entstehung des Begriffs “HM” 

                     Formation of the definition “Human Capital” #p#分頁標題#e#

                   （人力資本這個概念的形成）

Between 20 and 30s of the 20th century, human capital theory has ready to come out. However, it ultimately did not appear in that era because under the historical condition at that time, there are not urgent needs of the formation of human capital theory whether in theory or in practice. Although the mainstream school of neoclassical economics has repeatedly challenged, economists at that time mainly focus on the problem of the big economic crisis in western countries. So, the problem of unemployment and business cycle fluctuations became the most important and urgent problems which need to be solved. This historical condition can only bring up Keynesian economics theory, namely the short-term economic behavior theory. Because human capital investment and benefit are a long-term economic behavior, therefore the issue of human capital has not been able to be included in the view of mainstream economics until after the Second World War. The urgent need for human capital theory after the Second World War comes from the following respects.

(1) The reflections of experiences in post-war reconstruction of Europe

The Second World War gave both sides unprecedented losses of life and property. After the war, reconstruction and revival has become some countries’ urgent and arduous task. Unlike Europe countries, United States suffered no hurt, but benefits a lot from the war. In order to establish and strengthen the western camp, in 1947 the U.S. government adopted the then secretary of state George Marshall's advice, developed an aid plan to help reconstruction and revival of the European economy, known as the “Marshall plan”. The Marshall plan turned out to be a huge success.

American economist Lincoln Gordon served as the office of E.C.A. special representative in Europe from 1949 to 1959. In 1984, when discussing on the successful experience of Marshall Plan, he put forward the importance of “social capital”. Gordon believed that workers who mastered the knowledge of technology, all the necessary skills and abilities to learn new technologies are the basic conditions for the success of Marshall Plan. Schultz has also pointed out in 1962 that postwar economic recovery of Germany and Japan’s advantage is the aspect of human capital, and the disadvantage is the aspect of physical capital.

(2) The solution of the economic riddles

The western world economic crisis in the 30s of the 20th century brought up the Keynesian theory which greatly promoted the development of the economics. But in the 50s, economics met many new difficulties and challenges. Growth theory and capital theory of neoclassical economics grasp the assumption of capital homogeneity and labor homogeneity. But some theories which are based on such assumptions are not consistent with many economic facts or conflict with each other, therefore produces a series of “economic puzzles”. These puzzles promote the theoretical need of the human capital theory. Becker (1972) and Schultz (1972) particularly emphasized on the important role of solving the mystery of economy in the production process of human capital theory when analyzing the background of the theory of human capital. #p#分頁標題#e#

The first one who explicitly put forward the concept of “human capital” is the American economist Schultz. He was in the late 1950s and early 1960s published a series of important articles: Reflections on Agricultural Production, Output and Supply (1956), Investment in Human Capital (1961), Reflections on Investment in Man (1962) which became the cornerstone of modern human capital theory. In his article of Investment in Man: An Economist's View, he firstly referred to the concept of human capital. Especially, Schulz in 1960 published a speech titled as Investment in Human Capital in the 73th annual meeting of the American Economic Association, caused the sensation of American economics field.

The economist who completed the development of human capital theory from the concrete level to the abstract level was another American economist Gary Stanley Becker. Becker published successively in 1962 and 1964 Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis and Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. The latter is viewed as a sign of the final establishment of modern human capital theory. From the perspective of household production and distribution of personal resources (especially time), Becker systematically elaborated on human capital and the investment problems of human capital, put forward the concepts of child’s direct costs and indirect costs, the family time value, time allocation, family market activities and non-market activities, provided persuasive theoretical explanations for the nature of the human capital and human capital investment behaviors. Since then, the theory of human capital obtained unceasing development and perfection, and played an increasingly important role in the economy and in the life.

           2.2.4. Die endogene Wachstumstheorie (HK als endogener Faktor;...) 

                     The endogenic Development Theory 

                   （人力資本作為內因要素）

    The endogenous growth theory was developed by economists, including Paul Romer and Robert Lucas, in the mid-1980s. The theory came about because economists had become increasingly dissatisfied with Neo-classical growth models that did not explain where the technological changes in economies came from. Endogenous growth theory states that economic growth is generated internally and not by external forces as the Neo-classical model suggests. The endogenous growth theory argues that technological change is a response to economic incentives in the market that can be influenced by the government or private sector. Endogenous growth theory states that investment in human capital, innovation and knowledge are significant contributors to economic growth, because they help to develop new technology and make production become more efficient.

The path-breaking works of Romer (1986, 1990), Lucas (1988), Prescott and Boyd (1987), Rebelo (1991), Grossman and Helpman (1991) and Aghion and Howitt (1992) demonstrate how the technology (or new knowledge -capital) can be endogenized in a dynamic general equilibrium framework in which all factors including the factors that supply new ‘knowledge’ or technology are paid their marginal products. Growth theory bounced back in the last decade with a passionate search of the fundamental questions of economic growth and development: “ Why Are We So Rich and They Poor?” (David S. Landes, 1990) or, “Is there some action that a government of India could take that would lead the Indian economy to grow like Indonesia’s or Egypt’s? If so, what exactly? If not, what is it about the ‘nature of India’ that makes it so? The consequences for human welfare involved in questions like these are simply staggering: Once one starts to think about them, it is hard to think about anything else.” (Lucas, 1988)#p#分頁標題#e#

One of the constraints that have plagued these inquiries is the steady state equilibrium framework that the mainstream growth theorists traditionally adhere to. A related but perhaps more important problem is the practice of assuming a particular production function a priori (for example the AK technology in endogenous growth literature given by Y=AK, where Y is the aggregate output, K the capital stock and A, a constant)  . If one assumes a production technology like AK, the final result is known. Such an economy shall exhibit a sustained long-run growth without exogenous technological change, and the economy’s growth rate shall be determined by the specific technology assumed for the endogenous K (styled as ‘broad’ capital which includes human capital) sector.

Ray etal (1999) departs from this conventional approach of imposing a particular structure on the growth dynamics of economies by way of assuming a particular production technology. A post-industrial knowledge -rich economy is described instead and the conditions under which it may exhibit increasing returns to scale are analyzed. They showed that a knowledge-rich and a knowledge-poor economy cannot be described by the same production technology even in the long run and proved that the production technology of the aggregate economy in a knowledge-rich space might exhibit non-convexities while the same is not true for a knowledge-poor economy.

In its 1988 paper, Robert Lucas presented a model in which the ultimate goal is to endogenise economic growth. In that model, the ‘engine’ of growth is human capital, as human capital accumulation raises the productivity of both labor and physical capital. This is the main feature of the model. In spite of having been much upgraded by other contributors, the importance of the Lucas model resides in the fact that he provided the first human capital approach to endogenous growth.The basic idea of the model is that people divide their time between work and training. So, there is a trade-off, since when taking on training people give up part of their work income, but raise their future productivity, and therefore their future wages.In essence, this trade-off is just like the typical one appearing in physical capital accumulation: it is a a question of postponing income today (and hence consumption) for income tomorrow. Thus, the decisions concerning the accumulation of human depend on the dynamic features of the economy, which makes it endogenous. Since human capital accumulation is the ‘engine’ of growth, growth will itself be endogenous as well. This model has two types of capital: physical and human capital. The fundamental equation of the model which is a portfolio equilibrium equation states that in steady-state the marginal product of the two types of capital must be the same. This implies that the dynamics of accumulation of the two types of capital are interlinked. This prediction of the model seems to make sense in the real world. The model is quite simplistic in the sense that its assumptions are quite reductive. The main results of the model can be summarized as follows:#p#分頁標題#e#

(1) The higher the productivity of training, the higher will be the increase in the marginal product labor that follows training and hence the higher the future wage rate. This means that the incentives to training are greater and so will be the growth rate of the economy.

(2) The lower is the rate of ‘impatience’, that is the less consumers privilege present relative to future consumption, the more will workers be willing to forsake present consumption to dedicate themselves to training. Therefore, the higher will be the rate of economic growth.

In her 1991 paper, Nancy Stokey devised a model aimed at explaining growth phenomena such as that experienced by some successful new industrialized countries in East Asia, where rapid economic growth has been accompanied by high volume of exports, rapid growth in education and rapid changes in the composition of output. In this model, labor is heterogeneous and differentiated by the level of human capital. The technology for human capital accumulation used in the model is one that distinguishes between the private human capital of individuals and the stock of knowledge of the society as a whole. An individual accumulates human capital by investing, that is, going to school. His level of human capital upon leaving school and entering the labor force depends: on the length of his investment period, which he chooses; on the effectiveness of the time spent, which is determined by the social stock of knowledge. The level of human capital of an individual upon entering the work force determines his wage over the rest of his life, which he spends working. Thus, his choice about the length of the investment period is made by balancing the opportunity cost of later entry into the work force against higher wage rate paid to more skilled labor. Private investment in schooling also has an external effect (externality): it causes growth in the social stock of knowledge, which increases the effectiveness of time spent in school. Since it is assumed that individuals are finite lived, this external effect is the only source of steady-state growth. In much of the related literature in which labor of different skill levels is assumed to be perfectly substitutable in production, that is, 1 unit of labor with human capital K is perfectly substitutable by K units of labor with human capital of unity. In contrast, in Stokey’s model human capital is not perfectly substitutable.

This imperfect substitutability among different types of labor is modeled by allowing higher-quality labor to perform more highly-valued services. In the model, goods are differentiated in terms of quality. In this setting, as aggregate human capital grows, output consists of dropping lower-quality goods from production and adding higher-quality goods. This is the most distinctive feature of the model and one that seems extremely important in the ‘real world’.

In this model, economic growth is endogenous, since, as in Lucas model, growth is driven by the individuals’ investment in human capital which depends on variables internal to the model, such as the rate of ‘impatience’. The fact that it is the external effect which drives economic growth means that the growth rate under laisser-faire will be generally lower than the social one, so that the equilibrium is inefficient. The reason is that, since the decision to invest in human capital by any individual is made in such a way as to optimize its private earnings profile, the externalities are not taken into account and investment will be sub-optimal. The model has another important finding. In an open economy setting, in which economies are assumed to trade among themselves, the model shows that for economies that are sufficiently backward relatively to the rest of the world, the optimal investment rate will be generally lower than in the rest of the world. The reason is that, since high-skilled labor is relatively abundant in the rest of the world, international trade will push the prices of high quality goods downwards, reducing the incentive of individuals to invest in human capital.#p#分頁標題#e#

 

    2.3. ....（Schooling und Wachstum(mikroökonomische Sichtweise))

 

3. Einfluss des Humankapitals auf das Wirtschaftswachstum 

    人力資本對經濟發展的作用 （著眼于關系，貢獻）

    (Zusammenhänge, Beitrag)

    3.1. Humankapital

           人力資本

           3.1.1. Ausbildung und Gesundheit 

                   教育和健康 （形成人力資本的兩個核心要素）

                    (Keyfaktor für HK); 

    In the course of development, few processes are as intertwined with economic growth as human capital accumulation. Schooling makes workers more productive, speeds the development of new technologies, and better equips parents to raise skilled children, all of which promote economic growth. Growth, in turn, incentivizes investment in human capital. Causal links point in every direction, traversing phases of the life cycle as well as generations. The entangled role of human capital is not limited to aggregate income growth, however. Education exhibits complex dynamic relationships with several components of wellbeing, including health. For example, education affects health in adulthood; life expectancy affects educational investment in childhood; and the health and education of parents—particularly mothers—affects both outcomes in their children. Just as with income, these relationships are likely to be especially important in developing countries, where levels of both schooling and health are low but have risen rapidly over the past half-century (Becker et al. 2005 , Barro and Lee 2011 ).

The relationship between human capital and education lies in the fact that education considerably improves the concept of human beings as capital as well as their economic and productive output. Human beings are considered capital in the sense that they generate income and other types of necessary outputs over the course of their lives. This concept may be compared to other forms of investments and assets, such as manufacturing plants and production companies, which are also considered to be capital capable of producing good returns over time. Education is an investment in human beings that may come in various forms. It may be in the form of learning a trade or obtaining a degree, it could take the form of seminars and workshops, or it could be in the form of personal development programs aimed at improving personal skills. The bottom line and the connection between human capital and education is the fact that education improves the economic and productive worth of an individual. In a strict sense, capital as applied to human beings refers to those factors that improve their value and worth. Such factors include computer skills training, classroom training, and various forms of informal training. Capital may also refer to governmental expenses on hospitals and the development of a healthcare system. These aspects improve human productivity in the same way that manufacturing plants improve the production of goods. The difference is that manufacturing plants can be separated from the owners and listed as separate capital, whereas the training a person acquires cannot be separated from the person.#p#分頁標題#e#

Another way of viewing the concept of human capital and education is to consider the effect human productivity has on the Gross Domestic Output (GDP) of a nation. GDP is often used as a measure of the economic situation on a country. Those countries with high a high GDP often have a well-trained and educated workforce. They also have good healthcare models that improve the health and life expectancy of their workers. This illustrates that human capital and education cannot be separated from the economic development of a nation. Educated individuals are not just able to contribute more to the economy of the nation, they are also able to spend more due to higher incomes. GDP is influenced by the effects of demand for goods and services in relation to the supply. As such, when people are educated, they will have more money with which to demand more goods and the GDP will increase as a consequence.

Health is another important component of human resource development. Increased income and reduced poverty make people afford better diets, improved health care, and healthier living conditions. Healthier people can transform their energy into productivity, both mental and physical, more efficiently than ill health and undernourished people can do. An efficient use of people’s productivity turns into more economic output, higher income and economic development.  The assumption behind this relationship is that health contributes in building good human capital, which contributes in economic development and on the other hand, economic development enhances people’s affordability to buy food and health care service. Usually better nutrition leads workers to better workability and thereby better income. 

On the other hand, economic capabilities affect health, as low income constrains access to health care and health promoting opportunities . The capacity of work done by people depends on different factors, one of which is nutrition and health. Impact of health and nutrition on economic activities of workers can be understood in three different phases; current working capacity of workers, children’s working capacity in future, intergenerational working capacity, particularly for female labor force. Better health and nutrition can immediately increase the workers’ current strength, energy and ability to concentrate on job and thereby increases the productivity of workers. Ill health and nutrition reduces the probability of participation and the intensity of job seeking by the unemployed. Ill health workers can adjust their work if it is self-employment, but in the case of wage labor it is difficult to adjust those works, which are already lost. In these cases sick people are excluded from the labor market, as there is availability of relatively healthy and nourished people in the market especially in developing countries, where open unemployment is a big problem . Better productivity of workers lead to better economic output, which ultimately adds not only to country’s economic development, but also to individual’s own economic status. Better child health and nutrition promote future productivity by helping children develop into stronger, healthier adults. Healthy and well-nourished children can definitely achieve higher intelligence and educational attainment. And it is obvious that education helps enhancing worker’s skill and productivity. #p#分頁標題#e#

           3.1.2. Humankapitalstocks und -akkumlation

                     Human capital stock and the accumulation of human capital

                     人力資本存量和人力資本積累

    3.2. Analyse der Modelle

           模型分析

           3.2.1. Harrod-Domar-Modell und Solow-Swan-Modell

           3.2.2. MRW-Modell （重點在模式的變化上，比如此模式是Solow－Swan－Model的進一步發展。將人力資本引入。但仍是外因）

                     (Mankiw-Romer-Weil-Modell, Erweiterung des SSMs; HM in PF eingeführt;

                      ....;trozdem exogen;...)

           3.2.3. Romer-Modell （人力資本存量起決定作用，內因）

                     (Höhe des HM-stocks entscheidend; endogen; ...)

           3.2.4. Lucas-Modell （人力資本累計起決定作用，內因）

                     (Ausbildung und Learning by doing;endogen;HM-akkumulation entscheidend)

 

     3.3. Auswirkung des HKs auf das Wachstum （人力資本對經濟發展的影響／作用）

            3.3.1. Einfluss des HKs auf Produktivität und Einkommen des Individuums

                      人力資本對生產力和個體收入上的影響作用

            3.3.2. ROE & ROH (in Bezug auf Ausbildungs- und Gesundheitskapital)

                      教育收益率／健康收益率 （注意先解釋教育資本和健康資本）

                      Return on Education & Return on Health

             3.3.2.1. Direkter Einfluss durch die Investition in Ausbildung und Gesundheit

                          教育和健康的投資對經濟發展的直接影響

    3.3.2.2. Indirekter Einfluss durch die gegenseitiger Wirkungen zwischen Ausbildung und Gesundheit

                          教育和健康之間的相互作用對經濟發展的間接影響#p#分頁標題#e#

             

      (3.4. Einfluss auf technologischen Fortschritt .... (eine Perspective)...event. in Bezug auf die Unterscheidung der Romer u. Lucas-Theorem)

 

 

4. Empirische Untersuchung （經驗性研究／案例分析）

     4.1. Fallstudie in China   

     4.2. Fallstudie in den USA

     4.3. .....

 

5. Kritik (event. Perspektive..) （對理論的批判評價，不足，問題，展望等等）

 

6. Fazit （總結）

 

 

Literaturverzeichnis

 

 

Anhang