We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter explores the rapid increase in wealth and income inequality and the doubling of child poverty during the Thatcher decade, 1979–90, when neoliberalism rose to ascendency. It looks at how this sapped the population’s resilience as less obvious but equally pervasive inequalities of health and economic opportunity took root, with cuts to public services including education, public health and adult social care ratcheted up during the post-2010 austerity. It will present evidence that inequality reduces economic growth, harms children’s life chances and undermines social cohesion, while the super-rich do disproportionate environmental damage.
The chapter will then show how those who need to fall back on the social safety net to claim Universal Credit and its predecessor benefits have been subjected to relentless cuts in entitlements, a four-year benefit freeze and a five-week waiting period that pushed people into reliance on food banks and plunged many into permanent debt. It will conclude by looking in further depth at why, in the light of all of this, COVID-19 was anything but levelling in its impact, as so many people had little or no savings to cushion them and were unable to afford to take time off sick or to self-isolate.
This paper argues that output can respond to public education spending in a delayed and persistent manner through human capital accumulation. We refer to this as a “time-release” response, reflecting that the output response grows as students exposed to increased expenditures sequentially enter the labor market. We first develop and calibrate a stochastic overlapping generations model to formalize the propagation of spending shocks over a long time horizon. We then empirically explore this time-release aspect of shocks to government education expenditures on output using US state-level data for the period 1963–2016 and a panel structural vector autoregression methodology. Consistent with the model, our empirical results show that the dynamic response of output to shocks to government education expenditures is positive, significant, and long-lasting.
This chapter analyzes attitudes and preferences toward education spending. Relying on representative survey data for eight European countries, it (1) studies what citizens want when it comes to education spending and (2) explores explanations for these preferences, i.e. the main latent political cleavages over education reform. The first part of the chapter sheds theoretical and empirical light on the question how salient is education expenditure compared to other (social) policy areas. Moreover, it explores how attitudes toward education spending relate to attitudes toward means to finance this spending (via taxation, debt, or retrenchment in other areas). The second part of the chapter studies preferences toward the distribution of spending on different sectors of the education system. The results show, among other things, that compared to other issues education is highly salient, particularly schools and vocational education and training. While public support drops considerably once increases in expenditure come at a price, there is an astonishingly high support for education-related taxes. The chapter reports evidence for several potential cleavages over education spending (e.g. along respondents’ income and educational backgrounds), the most consistent one being a partisan divide.
Proceeding population aging might fuel generational conflicts about the distribution of welfare state resources in the future, but the existing evidence on the extent of generational cleavages in attitudes towards the welfare state is mixed. We argue that these mixed findings are partially related to an underestimation of trade-offs on the level of individual preferences. Using novel data from a survey experiment conducted in eight Western European countries, we show that age-related self-interest is an important determinant of social policy preferences. When elderly respondents are confronted with hypothetical cutbacks in pensions, they are much less likely to support additional education spending. However, we also find evidence for a mediating effect of social trust: high-trusting elderly individuals are more likely to support education spending – contrary to their narrow self-interest – than low-trusting elderly.
Although it is commonly believed that democracy promotes public services such as education, efforts have just started to evaluate empirically how the recent trend of democratization affects education services in the developing world. This article reports on the first regionwide investigation in East Asia. By studying the effects of democracy on multiple education indicators in a time-series-cross-section dataset of eight East Asian countries/political entities, the article examines whether democratic governments increase education spending and access and which social groups are favored in the process. The statistical results, which are corroborated by findings from two case studies, show that democracy plays a progressive role in promoting education spending and school enrollment at the basic level in East Asia.
We develop a theoretical model where child labour results from a household's
trade-off between sending a child to school or to work. Education is
considered as a risky investment, since the survival of the child is not
certain. We explore the effects of public expenditure on education and
health on child labour, specifying a transmission mechanism for each kind of
spending. On the one hand, we establish that health expenditure reduces
child labour all the more as child mortality rate is high. On the other
hand, a moderate aversion to risk is a necessary condition for education
expenditure to reduce child labour. Our theoretical results are empirically
validated on panel data from 66 developing countries between 1985 and
2000.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.