Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2021 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 48

Measurement of Individuals’ Overeducation in the Labour Market of Turkey: Bivariate Probit Model Application

Türkiye İşgücü Piyasasında Bireylerin Aşırı Eğitimliliğinin Ölçülmesi: İki Değişkenli Probit Model Uygulaması

Pages
271–292
Publication Date
2021-04-28
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that while experience harms overeducation, an increase in the education level has a positive effect on overeducation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study aims to empirically investigate the overeducation phenomenon within the context of the Turkish labour market.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, data belonging to the working population aged 15-65 are extracted from the Turkish household workforce survey results covering the period of 2014- 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that while experience harms overeducation, an increase in the education level has a positive effect on overeducation.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2014- 2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Aşırı Eğitimlilik · Probit Model · İki Aşamalı Heckman Probit Seçim Modeli

Abstract

The present study aims to empirically investigate the overeducation phenomenon within the context of the Turkish labour market. For this purpose, data belonging to the working population aged 15-65 are extracted from the Turkish household workforce survey results covering the period of 2014- 2018. Analyses were conducted based on a two-state probit model. Heckman’s (1979) two-stage probit selection model was used to consider unobservable factors affecting the decision to participate in the labour market and the overeducation status. The findings indicate that while experience harms overeducation, an increase in the education level has a positive effect on overeducation. The study concludes with policy recommendations.

Özet

Çalışmanın amacı işgücü ile aşırı eğitim arasındaki ilişkiyi ortaya koyarak Türkiye için bir uygulama sunmaktır. Bu kapsamda 2014-2018 yılları hanehalkı işgücü verilerinden yararlanılarak 15- 65 yaşlarında SGK’ya kayıtlı istihdamdaki bireylerle çalışılmıştır. Ekonometrik modellemede iki durumlu probit modelin yanısıra hem işgücü piyasasına katılma kararını hem de aşırı eğitimlilik durumunu etkileyen gözlemlenemeyen faktörleri hesaba katmak amacıyla Heckman’ın (1979) iki aşamalı probit seçim modeli kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular deneyimin aşırı eğitim üzerinde negatif bir etkiye sahip olduğu yönündedir. Bireyin eğitim düzeyinde meydana gelecek bir artış ise aşırı eğitim üzerinde pozitif bir etki yaratmaktadır. Çalışmada ayrıca politika değerlendirmelerinde bulunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

KANTARMACI, S., DEMİROGLARI, S., ERK, H., ÜÇDOĞRUK, Ş. (2021). Measurement of Individuals’ Overeducation in the Labour Market of Turkey: Bivariate Probit Model Application. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 48, 271–292. https://ajindex.com/articles/139264

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Acar, E.Ö. (2017), “The Effect of Education-Job Mismatch on Wages: A Panel Analysis of The Turkish Labor Market”, International Journal of Economic & Administrative Studies, (18), 339-354.
  2. Bauer, T.K. (2002), “Educational Mismatch and Wages: A Panel Analysis”, Economics of Education Review, 21(3), 221-229.
  3. Becker, G. (1964), Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, New York: Columbia University Press.
  4. Becker, G. (1991),
  5. A Treatise On the Family, Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England. Bonnal, M. & L. Cristina & N.A. Samuel (2009), “Underemployment and Local Employment Dynamics: New Evidence”, The Review of Regional Studies, 39(3), 317-335.
  6. Büchel, F. & M. Van Ham (2003), “Overeducation, Regional Labour Markets, and Spatial Flexibility”, Journal of Urban Economics, 53, 482-493.
  7. Büchel, F. (2002), “The Effects of Overeducation on Productivity in Germany - The Firms’ Viewpoint”, Economics of Education Review, 21(3), 263-275.
  8. Capsada-Munsech, Q. (2019), “Measuring Overeducation: Incidence, Correlation and Overlaps Across Indicators and Countries”, Social Indicators Research, 145(1), 279-301.
  9. Carnoy, M. (1989), “Eğitim ve Ekonomi İlişkisi”, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, Çev: N. Kurul 22(1), 485-504.
  10. Chevalier, A. (2003), “Measuring Over‐Education”, Economica, 70(279), 509-531.
  11. Çakmak, E. & S. Gümüş (2005), “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermaye ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Ekonometrik Bir Analiz”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 60(01), 59-72.
  12. De Grip, A. & H. Bosma & D. Willems & M. Van Boxtel (2008), “Job-Worker Mismatch and Cognitive Decline”, Oxford Economic Papers, 60(2), 237-253.
  13. De Oliveira, M.M. & M.C. Santos & B.F. Kiker (2000), “The Role of Human Capital and Technological Change in Overeducation”, Economics of Education Review, 19(2), 199-206.
  14. Dereli, B.E. (2017), “Determinants of Education Mismatch in Turkey: Evidence from Household Labor Force Surveys”, Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 39(2), 521-532.
  15. Dolton, P. & A. Vignoles (2000), “The Incidence and Effects of Overeducation in The UK Graduate Labour Market”, Economics of Education Review, 19, 179-198.
  16. Duncan, G.J. & S.D. Hoffman (1981), “The Incidence and Wage Effects of Overeducation”, Economics of Education Review, 1(1), 75-86.
  17. Emeç, H. & Ş. Üçdoğruk-Birecikli & B. Kümbül-Güler (2019), “Türkiye’de Gençlerde Eksik İstihdamın Analizi”, Business and Organization Research (International Conferen