of a rather ‘kitchen-sink’ nature so that its estimate is not easy to interpret. The effect of
family allowances is in fact significant at 10 percent level, which may indicate that relaxing
parents’ budget constraints in the poorest families may have a positive effect on the average
achievement level of students.
Table 5. The effect of social expenditures on student achievement | ||||||||
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
(7) |
(8) | |
Gov. social expenditures, percent |
-0.488* (0.223) |
-0.670** (0.230) |
-0.997* (0.464) |
-0.899+ (0.457) |
0.505 |
- |
- |
- |
GDP per capita (log) |
- |
0.717* |
0.523 |
1.508+ |
6.500** |
-0.686 |
0.546 |
-0.008 |
(0.315) |
(0.895) |
(0.863) |
(2.355) |
(1.262) |
(0.872) |
(1.000) | ||
Percentage secondary school |
- |
1.225** |
0.548 |
0.433 |
0.572 |
-0.026 |
0.671 |
0.444 |
attained among adults (log) |
(0.275) |
(0.627) |
(0.604) |
(1.167) |
(1.255) |
(0.6216 |
(0.704) | |
Population size (log) |
- |
-0.028 |
4.448+ |
2.865 |
-11.63 |
-2.474 |
3.653 |
4.268 |
(0.61) |
(2.398) |
(2.371) |
(9.178) |
(4.845) |
(2.323) |
(3.132) | ||
Trend |
- |
- |
- |
-0.031 (0.022) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
Pension spending (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
-2.470* (1.033) |
-0.986** |
- |
Active labor market policy |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
-0.392 (0.298) |
- |
-0.576** |
Unemployment spending (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
-0.317 (0.210) |
- |
- |
Family allowances (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.824+ (0.422) |
- |
- |
Health care spending (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.208 |
- |
- |
Housing spending (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
-0.042 (0.198) |
- |
- |
Other spending (log) |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
0.912 |
- |
- |
Country fixed effects |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Time fixed effects |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Country specific trends |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Observations |
124 |
121 |
121 |
121 |
118 |
80 |
121 |
113 |
No of countries |
29 |
28 |
28 |
28 |
26 |
19 |
28 |
28 |
R2 |
0.038 |
0.339 |
0.861 |
0.835 |
0.932 |
0.825 |
0.868 |
0.863 |
R2 (within) |
- |
- |
0.258 |
0.118 |
0.665 |
0.571 |
0.293 |
0.376 |
Note. Absolute standard errors in parentheses, +, * and ** |
: denote significance at 10, 5 and 1 percent level, |
The different expenditure components are positively correlated, which may contribute to the
heterogeneous and mainly insignificant effects in column (6). Thus, we have run regressions
19
More intriguing information
1. Fiscal Insurance and Debt Management in OECD Economies2. Target Acquisition in Multiscale Electronic Worlds
3. Public-Private Partnerships in Urban Development in the United States
4. PACKAGING: A KEY ELEMENT IN ADDED VALUE
5. The name is absent
6. Evidence of coevolution in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The ultimate determinants of central bank independence
10. Strategic Investment and Market Integration