Mobility and the Return to Education: Testing a Roy Model with Multiple Markets
迁移与教育回报：多市场 Roy 模型的检验AI 解读 ↓
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明
本页整理公开书目信息，不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成，未完成全文核验，可能有误；具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本，未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要；缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录，不合计多个记录；关联记录可能包含正式发表版本，不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零，引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配，同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列，再参考通用方法与发表日期。
分类依据与纠错
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类：摘要以多个居住与工作地点构成离散选择，并建立收入与迁移的 Roy 结构模型及选择校正方法，对应离散选择和结构估计。
反馈分类问题
正在核对关联版本…
代码、数据与补充材料
正在核对对应版本的资源…
关注这篇论文的作者
迁移与教育回报：多市场 Roy 模型的检验
- 研究问题
- 劳动者在不同州之间的自选择迁移，如何影响当地大学教育回报的估计？校正这种选择后，州际教育回报差异是否仍然存在？
- 方法与思路
- 作者建立多市场迁移与收入 Roy 模型，结合参数化最大次序统计量方法与半参数选择估计构造校正，并使用美国 1990 年人口普查数据。
- 材料陈述的贡献
- 摘要称，所提半参数校正易于实施；实证显示自选择通常造成州级教育回报的 OLS 估计向上偏，但校正并未缩小州际回报的范围。
- 阅读关注点
- 阅读全文时应核对 Roy 模型的选择与收入假设、半参数校正的识别条件，以及教育回报、地区宜居条件和迁移流之间关系的具体检验。
- 阅读边界
- 摘要未给出完整识别条件、变量定义及估计不确定性；选择校正后的教育回报仍需结合模型假设解释，不能据此概括其他时期或地区。
原文摘要
Self-selected migration presents one potential explanation for why observed returns to a college education in local labor markets vary widely even though U.S. workers are highly mobile.To assess the impact of self-selection on estimated returns, this paper first develops a Roy model of mobility and earnings where workers choose in which of the 50 states (plus the District of Columbia) to live and work.Available estimation methods are either infeasible for a selection model with so many alternatives or place potentially severe restrictions on earnings and the selection process.This paper develops an alternative econometric methodology which combines Lee's (1983) parametric maximum order statistic approach to reduce the dimensionality of the error terms with more recent work on semiparametric estimation of selection models (e.g., Ahn and Powell, 1993).The resulting semiparametric correction is easy to implement and can be adapted to a variety of other polychotomous choice problems.The empirical work, which uses 1990 U.S. Census data, confirms the role of comparative advantage in mobility decisions.The results suggest that self-selection of higher educated individuals to states with higher returns to education generally leads to upward biases in OLS estimates of the returns to education in state-specific labor markets.While the estimated returns to a college education are significantly biased, correcting for the bias does not narrow the range of returns across states.Consistent with the finding that the corrected return to a college education differs across the U.S., the relative state-to-state migration flows of college-versus high school-educated individuals respond strongly to differences in the return to education and amenities across states.