The Economization of Early Life: Human Capital Theory, Biology, and Social Policy

Abstract

The US government response to the coronavirus pandemic has prompted renewed debate about the size and structure of the welfare state. Particular attention has been paid to prenatal and early childhood policy, domains in which the US safety net is less robust than those of its peer countries. Contra claims that the so-called care economy constitutes a sharp break with the neoliberal consensus, this article argues that the shift in social policy focus toward early life is consistent with changes in economic ideas about the best environment in which to grow “human capital”: the economization of early life. Building on insights about “critical periods” of development drawn from diverse fields including epigenetics and neurobiology, economists estimate that human capital gains are greatest when “investments in people” occur before the age of five. This article traces the history of how this research was brought to the attention of federal policy makers in the United States. While much human capital–focused social policy traditionally placed the burden of risk on the private family (e.g., with student loan debt or health insurance), in recent years, economists have instead argued that social programs dedicated to early childhood development are more “efficient” sources of public investment.

Enhancing College Access in Zimbabwe: Impact of Student Loans and Grants

“…This suggests that student loan and grant programs have demonstrably improved access to higher education for disadvantaged groups in Zimbabwe, increasing human capital in the country. Human Capital theory suggests that investment in human capital leads to higher lifetime earnings and economic growth (Griffen, 2024). However, the thematic analysis findings on student debt burden and career limitations raise concerns.…”

Brain drain incidence and health-care infrastructural deficit challenges: the role of capacity development among “JAPA” physicians in Nigeria

“…Critics, however, have claimed that the composite factors impacting brain drain and deficiencies in the health-care system excluded important and relevant information by HCT. In addition to financial incentives and professional paradigms, other aspects of considerations that impact brain drain intentions and decisions include political instability, social and cultural realities, and personal differences (Choudhury, 2022; Griffen, 2024). Generally, HCT provides a significant perspective for understanding the importance of a highly professional health-care workforce as human capital assets and the impact of brain drain on health-care infrastructure and facilities.…”

Understanding Patterns and Trends in Income Mobility through Multiverse Analysis

“…Focusing on parental investments, it assumes intergenerational association represents, at least partly, a causal effect of income (Mayer 1997). By centering the role of inequality during childhood, it reinforces the "economization of early life" (Griffen 2023). This focus on the family, in turn, risks detracting from wider societal factors, such as market imperfections or power struggles in the arena of work.…”