Search results

This paper deals with the topic of measurement of education services. The main part of output of education services is considered to be non-market in the Czech Republic and it is estimated a sum of related costs. Deflation has been traditionally done using input method i.e. recalculation of each component separately. The main drawback of this method is an assumption of direct correlation between changes in inputs and changes in output. Productivity can not be estimated therefore output methods based on direct volume measurement are now preferred for individual services. Methodology of direct volume measurement of education services has been developed in the paper. This approach is based on number of students in detailed breakdown weighted by costs in order to include changes in the structure of fields of study. Estimates are available since 2004 as data sources are available. Besides estimates of development of non-market output development of all education services is estimated. Adapted from the source document.

The article contests an argument that the creation of a capital market in educational "human capital" and subsequent voluntary transactions on this market are sufficient to create equal opportunities in education, consequently reducing the income premium enjoyed by households with higher initial wealth endowment end eliminating deadweight detriments to efficiency caused by unequal household budget constraints. The counterargument is based on game-theoretical model developed in Bowles 2004. The inevitable incompleteness of contracts results in allocation inefficiency: agents with above average wealth endowment are able to finance larger projects, and/or projects of worse than average quality, while agents with insufficient initial wealth endowment are excluded from the financial market. This inefficiency can be attenuated only by redistribution enforced by the government. The article concludes with a discussion of the general relationship between equality (redistribution) and efficiency. Adapted from the source document.

The article presents the concept of human development & its measurement using the Human Development Index (HDI). The first three parts explain the evolution of the human development concept & the methodology of the HDI & provide some analysis of HDI results. The focus of the article is to critically discuss the HDI as a measure of human development. Based on critical perspectives of selected authors, the article analyses the weak points (and by implication the strong ones as well) of the HDI, & it also discusses proposed changes in the HDI methodology. The combination of relative comprehensiveness of the scope of the indicator & relative simplicity of its methodology made the HDI more popular than its creators may have expected. Despite all the critical comments on the HDI, it may be used as a summary measure of development. However, it should be noted that it may serve only as a rough measure. Adapted from the source document.