'The private and fiscal returns to schooling and the effect of public policies on private incentives to invest in education: a general framework and some results for the EU' (2005) CESifo Working Paper 1392.

Santrauka. Nors žmogiškojo kapitalo koncepcija ypatingo mokslininkų dėmesio sulaukė per pastaruosius penkis dešimtmečius, idėjos apie žmogiškąjį kapitalą ir žmogiškojo kapitalo sąvoką bei tai, kad įgyti gebėjimai ir įgūdžiai-tai kapitalas, investavimo į žmones būtinybė siekiant didinti produktyvumą, buvo gvildenamos jau gerokai anksčiau. Straipsnyje atskleidžiamos žmogiškojo kapitalo teorijos ištakos, siekiančios XVII-XIX a., pateikiama žmogiškojo kapitalo ekonominės minties istorinė raida, gvildenami žmogiškojo kapitalo samp ratos diskusiniai klausimai, apibrėžiami pagrindiniai žmogiškąjį kapitalą sudarantys elementai bei aptariami veiksniai, turintys įtakos žmogiškojo kapitalo formavimui. Reikšminiai žodžiai: žmogiškasis kapitalas, žmogiškojo kapitalo ekonominės minties istorinė raida, žmogiškojo kapitalo formavimas. JEL klasifikacija: E24, J24. Įvadas Visuotinai priimta, kad ekonomikos augimą lemia trys gamybos veiksniai-žemė, darbas ir kapitalas, prie kurių taip pat priskiriamas ir verslumas (Nafukho et al., 2004; Mincer, 1962, Becker, 1993a, Siddiqui, 1996). Darbas apibūdinamas kaip visi gamybos procesams naudojami žmogiškieji visuomenės ištekliai (Pass et al., 1997) ar, kaip nurodyta ekokonomikos terminų žodyne, žmogaus fizinių bei protinių gebėjimų naudojimas prekių ar paslaugų gamyboje. Nors žmogiškojo kapitalo koncepcija mokslininkų dėmesio ypač sulaukė per pastaruosius penkis dešimtmečius, idėjos apie žmogiškąjį kapitalą ir žmogiškojo kapitalo sąvoką bei tai, kad įgyti gebėjimai ir įgūdžiai-tai kapitalas ar investavimo į žmones

Straipsnyje analizuojama privati ir visuomeninė investicijų į žmogiškąjį kapitalą nauda ir kaštai, aptariami juos lemiantys veiksniai. Remiantis pateiktu investicijų į žmogiškąjį kapitalą kaštų ir naudos modeliu apskaičiuoti tokie pagrindiniai investicijų efektyvumo rodikliai: 1) privati universitetinių ir neuniversitetinių aukštojo mokslo studijų išsilavinimo pajamų norma, 2) visuomeninė pajamų norma. Autorių apskaičiuoti išsilavinimo pajamų normų rodikliai palyginami su analogiškais kitų išsivysčiusių šalių (EBPO) rodikliais.

The research literature presents a strong positive relationship between economic development and human capital, which is usually measured by education. The standard approach assumes that an individual invests some time in education, and then it shows up in terms of enhanced future earnings as a return, i.e. investment in education helps to increase the individuals' future earnings. How much to invest in education is one of the most important economic decisions that individuals have to face. Hundreds of studies in many different countries and time periods have confirmed that bettereducated individuals earn higher wages, suffer less unemployment and work in more prestigious occupations, have other social returns like honour and status than their less-educated counterparts. This positive correlation between education (schooling) and earnings is well established in the empirical literature. Despite the fact, that the rate of return to education (human capital) has been widely studied in the world since the late 1950s and even though hundreds of papers have studied this issue in various countries at different time periods and with alternative estimation methods, studies concerning Lithuania's case remain limited. This study focuses on the evaluation of investments in human capital. Problem question raised: Once education, which plays a very important role in development and growth of a country, is treated as an investment, the immediate natural question is: what is the profitability of this investment comparing to alternatives? Therefore it is important to investigate the return to investment in education in order to evaluate effectiveness of investments in human capital in Lithuania and compare it to the other countries in the development process. The object of the researchthe return to investment in human capital. The aim of the research is to estimate the private rate of return to human capital in Lithuania and to study the changes of these returns during the time (2003-2011) and compare calculated data with analogical data in other countries. In the first part of the paper the concept of "human capital" is defined, before estimating the returns to human capital. In order to reveal the return to investment in human capital, it was limited to investment in education overview. Further, the research methodology is presented. One of the main ways to calculate the rate of returns to investment in human capital, which is used in the empirical practice, is the "full-discounting" or "elaborate" method, which consists in calculating the internal rate of return, was employed. 2003-2011 statistical data were used for the study. The conclusions reveal that the rate of return to investment in human capital varies over time and rate of return for females is lower than for males. The rate of return of investment in human capital varies, reflecting the effect of constantly decreasing income tax, average wage and cost changes of higher increments of education (increase / decrease). After comparing Lithuania's and other countries' r...

Recently income inequality has been growing in many countries, and it is one of the biggest economic and social problems. The International Monetary Fund, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and other organizations stress the importance of this issue. According to Atkinson, Brandolini (2009), changes in income inequality show whether a particular society becomes more egalitarian over time or not, in which socio-economic direction it progresses.Even countries with similar economic structures differ in the level of income inequality and, according to Stiglitz (2015), differences in income inequality are related to policy decisions. The decisions of countries may depend on the prevailing view if markets are efficient or inefficient. In the first case, countries tend to rely more on neoliberal economic doctrine, and in the second, on the welfare state, where the role of government is more active (Stiglitz, 2017). However, it is observed that the growing income inequality is related to the growing role of the financial market, i.e. the phenomenon of financialization, which weakens the role of government. Thus, assessing the impact of financialization on income inequality is an actual topic of scientific debate.The results of studies, assessing the impact of financialization on income inequality, are mixed. Some financialization dimensions, such as financial liberalization, banking / financial crises increase income inequality, but microfinance intensity reduces income inequality. The contradictory results can be explained by the fact that research samples differ, various indicators reflecting the financialization are used, different independent variables are included in the regression equations.Studies have also been conducted in groups of countries that belong to different welfare state regimes (Josifidis, Mitrović, Supić, Glavaški, 2016; Dafermos, Papatheodorou, 2013). These studies emphasize that the level of income inequality is related to the efficiency of the social security system, i.e. income inequality is lower in Social–democratic welfare state regime (inherent universal social services and benefits) and Conservative–corporatist welfare state regime (social security model related to employment status) groups of countries than in the Mediterranean welfare state regime (characterized by the fragmentation of the social security model) and Liberal welfare state regime (inherent the specificity of the social security model, there is no universality) groups of countries. However, there is a lack of research that assesses the impact of financialization on income inequality in different welfare state regime groups of countries. The research problem: what is the impact of financialization on income inequality, is this impact the same in different EU welfare state regime groups? The object of the research - the impact of financialization on income inequality. The aim of the research is to assess the impact of financialization on income inequality in EU country groups.Research methods: analysis of scientific literature, grouping, generalization, regression analysis of panel data.When assessing the impact of financialization on income inequality in different welfare regimes EU country groups during the period 1998-2017, the least-squares regression analysis method of the panel data was used. The conducted research confirms the hypothesis and clearly shows that financialization, measured both by financial development index and domestic credit to the private sector, increases income inequality in all groups of countries. Thus, it shows that the role of the financial market is growing and financialization processes are contributing to the growth of income inequality in all groups of welfare regime countries and may reduce the role of government. These results are in line with Stiglitz, 2012; Razgūnė, 2017; Dünhaupt, 2014; Golebiowski, Szczepankowski, Wisniewska, 2016; Palley, 2008) who analyzed the relationship between financialization and growing income inequality. However, the study of Dabla-Norris et al. (2015), by contrast, find that the ratio of domestic credit to GDP in developed countries reduces income inequality.