1、 外文翻译 原文 Human Capital Material Source:The concise encyclopedia of economics Author:Gary S. Becker To most people, capital means a bank account, a hundred shares of IBM stock, assembly lines, or steel plants in the Chicago area. These are all forms of capital in the sense that they are assets that y
2、ield income and other useful outputs over long periods of time. But such tangible forms of capital are not the only type of capital. Schooling, a computer training course, expenditures on medical care, and lectures on the virtues of punctuality and honesty are also capital. That is because they rais
3、e earnings, improve health, or add to a persons good habits over much of his lifetime. Therefore, economists regard expenditures on EDUCATION, training, medical care, and so on as investments in human capital. They are called human capital because people cannot be separated from their knowledge, ski
4、lls, health, or values in the way they can be separated from their financial and physical assets. Education, training, and health are the most important investments in human capital. Many studies have shown that high school and college education in the United States greatly raise a persons income, e
5、ven after netting out direct and indirect costs of schooling, and even after adjusting for the fact that people with more education tend to have higher IQs and better-educated, richer parents. Similar evidence covering many years is now available from more than a hundred countries with different cul
6、tures and economic systems. The earnings of more-educated people are almost always well above average, although the gains are generally larger in less-developed countries. Consider the differences in average earnings between college and high school graduates in the United States during the past fift
7、y years. Until the early 1960s, college graduates earned about 45 percent more than high school graduates. In the 1960s, this premium from college education shot up to almost 60 percent, but it fell back in the 1970s to less than 50 percent. The fall during the 1970s led some economists and the medi
8、a to worry about “overeducated Americans.” Indeed, in 1976, Harvard economist Richard Freeman wrote a book titled The Overeducated American. This sharp fall in the return to investments caused doubt about whether education and training really do raise PRODUCTIVITY or simply provide signals (“credent
9、ials”) about talents and abilities. But the monetary gains from a college education rose sharply again during the 1980s, to the highest level since the 1930s. Economists Kevin M. Murphy and Finis Welch have shown that the premium on getting a college education in the 1980s was above 65 percent. This
10、 premium continued to rise in the 1990s, and in 1997 it was more than 75 percent. Lawyers, accountants, engineers, and many other professionals experienced especially rapid advances in earnings. The earnings advantage of high school graduates over high school dropouts has also greatly increased. Tal
11、k about overeducated Americans has vanished, replaced by concern about whether the United States provides adequate quality and quantity of education and other training. This concern is justified. Real wage rates of young high school dropouts have fallen by more than 25 percent since the early 1970s.
12、 This drop is overstated, though, because the INFLATION measure used to compute real wages overstates the amount of inflation over that time (see CONSUMER PRICE INDEXES). Real wages for high school dropouts stayed constant from 1995 to 2004, which means, given the price index used to adjust them, th
13、at these wages have increased somewhat. Thinking about higher education as an INVESTMENT in human capital helps us understand why the fraction of high school graduates who go to college increases and decreases from time to time. When the benefits of a college degree fell in the 1970s, for example, t
14、he fraction of white high school graduates who started college fellfrom 51 percent in 1970 to 46 percent in 1975. Many educators expected that enrollments would continue to decline in the 1980s, partly because the number of eighteen-year-olds was declining, but also because college tuition was risin
15、g rapidly. They were wrong about whites. The fraction of white high school graduates who entered college rose steadily in the 1980s, reaching 60 percent in 1988, and caused an absolute increase in the number of whites enrolling despite the smaller number of college-aged people. That percentage kept
16、increasing to an all-time high of 67 percent in 1997 and then declined slightly to 64 percent in 2000. Of course, formal education is not the only way to invest in human capital. Workers also learn and are trained outside schools, especially on the job. Even college graduates are not fully prepared
17、for the labor market when they leave school and must be fitted into their jobs through formal and informal training programs. The amount of on-the-job training ranges from an hour or so at simple jobs like dishwashing to several years at complicated tasks like engineering in an auto plant. The limit
18、ed data available indicate that on-the-job training is an important source of the very large increase in earnings that workers get as they gain greater experience at work. Bold estimates by Columbia University economist Jacob Mincer suggest that the total investment in on-the-job training may be wel
19、l above $200 billion a year, or about 2 percent of GDP. No discussion of human capital can omit the influence of families on the knowledge, skills, health, values, and habits of their children. Parents affect educational attainment, marital stability, propensities to smoke and to get to work on time
20、, and many other dimensions of their childrens lives. The enormous influence of the family would seem to imply a very close relation between the earnings, education, and occupations of parents and children. Therefore, it is rather surprising that the positive relation between the earnings of parents
21、 and children is not so strong, although the relation between the years of schooling of parents and their children is stronger. The continuing growth in per capita incomes of many countries during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is partly due to the expansion of scientific and technical knowl
22、edge that raises the productivity of labor and other inputs in production. And the increasing reliance of industry on sophisticated knowledge greatly enhances the value of education, technical schooling, on-the-job training, and other human capital. New technological advances clearly are of little v
23、alue to counries that have very few skilled workers who know how to use them. ECONOMIC GROWTH closely depends on the synergies between new knowledge and human capital, which is why large increases in education and training have accompanied major advances in technological knowledge in all countries t
24、hat have achieved significant economic growth. The outstanding economic records of Japan, Taiwan, and other Asian economies in recent decades dramatically illustrate the importance of human capital to growth. Lacking NATURAL RESOURCESthey import almost all their ENERGY, for exampleand facing DISCRIM
25、INATION against their exports by the West, these so-called Asian tigers grew rapidly by relying on a well-trained, educated, hardworking, and conscientious labor force that makes excellent use of modern technologies. China, for example, is progressing rapidly by mainly relying on its abundant, hardw
26、orking, and ambitious population . 译文 人力资本 资料来源：经济学的简明百科全书 作 者：加里贝克 对大多数人来说，资本是指一个银行帐户， IBM 的股票，装配线，或钢铁厂一百年在芝加哥地区的股票。这些都是真正意义上的资本形式，他们的收入和资产收益率在很长一段时间有其他有用的输出。但是，资本等有形形式不是唯一的资本类型。学校教育，计算机培训课程，医疗保健支出，以及对准时，诚实的美德讲座也是资本。这是因为他们提高收入，改善健康，或增加超过他生命的大部分时间的一个人的好习惯。因此，经济学家认为教育，培训，医疗保健支出，等叫做人力资本。他们被称为人力资本，是因为人
27、们无法从他们的知识，技能，健康，或在他 们可以从他们的财务和实物资产的价值分离的方式分开。 教育，培训，健康是人力资本的最重要的投资。许多研究表明，高中和大专以上学历在美国大大提高，即使剔除上学的直接和间接费用一人的收入，甚至以后的事实调整，随着更多教育的人往往有较高的智商和更高学历，更有钱的父母。类似的证据包括许多年，现在可从一百多个具有不同文化背景和经济制度的国家中发现。更多教育的人的收入几乎总是大大高于平均水平，尽管涨幅一般都在欠发达国家更大。 考虑在过去 50多年间学院和美国高中毕业生的平均收入差异。直到 60年代初，大学毕业 生的收入约高于高中毕业生百分之四十五。在 20世纪 60年
28、代，从大学教育的溢价上升至近百分之六十，但它在 70年代下降到不足百分之五十。20世纪 70年代期间的下降导致一些经济学家和媒体担心“美国的教育过度”事实上，在 1976年，哈佛大学经济学家理查德弗里曼写了一本名美国教育过度的书。这无疑在向投资造成的教育和培训是否真的提高生产力或简单地提供有关的才干和能力的信号（“证书”）提出疑问。 但是，从大学教育收益货币再次大幅上涨，达到在 20世纪 80年代，到 20世纪 30年代以来的最高水平。经济学家凯文米墨菲和菲尼 什韦尔奇已经表明，在80年代就获得大学教育的溢价百分之六十五以上了。这个溢价持续上升，在 20世纪 90年代，并于 1997年，超过百
29、分之七十五。律师，会计师，工程师，和许多其他专业人士，特别是经历了收入的快速进展。在高中辍学以上的高中毕业生的收入优势，也大大增加。关于美国教育过度的言论都消失了，被美国是否提供了足够的质量和数量的教育和其他培训的关注所取代。 这种担忧是有道理的。高中辍学的青少年实际工资率下降了百分之二十五以上 20世纪 70年代初以来。这一下降被夸大了，但因为在这段时间用 通胀的措施来计算夸大了实际工资（见居民消费价格指数）通胀的金额。高中辍学的实际工资不断逗留 95年至 2004年，这意味着，用价格指数来调整他们，这些工资有所增加。 思维作为一种人力资本投资高等教育，帮助我们理解大学的比例增加和减少现象。
30、当一个大学学位的优势在 70年代下降，例如，白种的高中毕业生大学分数开始下降，从 1970年的百分之五十一至百分之四十六在 1975年。许多教育招生预计将继续下降， 20世纪 80年代，部分原因是十八岁的人数下降，但也因为大学的学费是迅速上升的。这都是白人的错误。那些白种高中毕业 生进入大学分数在 80年代稳步上升，达到 1988年的百分之六十，并导致在尽管大学的中年白人、报读人数较少的情况下的绝对值增加。这一比例不断增加至百分之 67，然后在 1997年略有下降到 2000年的百分之六十四。 当然，正规的教育并不是投资人力资本的唯一的方式。工人们也坚持学习，培训，尤其是在学校以外的工作。即使
31、是大学毕业生没有充分准备进入劳动力市场时，他们离开学校，必须通过正式和非正式的培训来胜任他们的工作。关于在职培训的范围从一个小时左右或像洗碗这样简单的工作至数年诸如汽车厂工程复杂的任务。现有的有限 数据表明，在职培训是工人从中获得收益，因为他们在工作中获得更大的经验和非常大的能力的增长。由哥伦比亚大学经济学家雅各明瑟大胆的估计表明，在对在职培训的总投资可能会远远高于 2000亿美元的一年，或占 GDP 的百分之二。 没有人力资本的讨论可以忽略知识，家庭，技能，健康，价值观，以及他们的孩子的习惯的影响。家长教育程度的影响，婚姻稳定，吸烟倾向，上班准时，和孩子的生活等许多方面。 家庭的巨大影响力，
32、似乎在暗示着和收入，教育，父母和子女的职业之间非常密切的关系。因此，相当令人惊讶的是父母和子女之间的 收入呈正相关关系不强，然而这和家长和他们的子女受教育年限的关系更强。 在十九世纪和二十世纪许多国家的人均收入的持续的增长的原因是科学和技术知识扩展，提高了劳动和其他生产投入的生产力。和行业方面的知识越来越依赖教育，技术教育，对在职培训和其他人力资本。 新的技术进步对那些没有懂得怎样运用这些技术的工人的国家是没有价值的。经济增长密切依赖于新的知识和人力资本，这就是为什么在教育和培训大量增加是伴随国家科技知识的重大进展和经济的增长。 日本，台湾等亚洲经济体在最近数十年来的纪录大大说明了人力资本对经济增长 的重要性。缺乏天然资源，他们的能源几乎都是进口的，例如，面对他们的反对西方出口的歧视，这些所谓的亚洲四小龙迅速崛起。由一支训练有素，受过良好教育，勤奋，认真的劳动力，依赖优秀人才，运用现代技术。中国，作为一个例子，进展迅速主要依靠丰富，勤奋和雄心勃勃的人力资本。
