What is concluded by adverse effects of education
Answers
The positive relationship between education and personal income is well established in economics (Card, 1999). Higher education tends to lead to higher income. It also has a favorable effect on an individual’s health (Cutler and Lleras-Muney, 2008). Many have argued that the benefits of education extend beyond the private return to the individual. For example, Moretti (2004) showed that increasing the supply of college graduates raises the income levels of others who live in the same city. Similarly, Murdock et al. (2003) showed that increasing levels of education are linked to lower crime.
Many social scientists in the 20th century believed that some degree of literacy was necessary for democracy to be sustained (Dahl, 1971; Lipset, 1959). Specifically, Friedman (1962: 86) claimed that “the gain from the education of a child accrues not only to the child or to his parents but also to other members of the society … by promoting a stable and democratic society.” Education is supposed to promote democracy by influencing the competence and cognitive orientations of individuals, and by providing experiences that instill democratic values.
We argue that increases in education favor democratization and that the effect of education on democracy is conditional on income. Prior research advances three main arguments that connect education with democracy. The first view emphasizes the connection between education and tolerance. More tolerant individuals should be more likely to favor democratic principles, such as the acceptance of the rights of the opposition and of those individuals that belong to marginalized groups. For instance, Lipset (1959) thought that education helps people understand the need for norms of tolerance. Bobo and Licari (1989) posited that education changes individuals’ cognitive styles in a way that makes people more likely to recognize the importance of extending civil liberties to those they dislike. Similarly, Golebiowska (1995) argued that higher education fosters individual value priorities that are conducive to greater openness to political diversity. Various works have found education to be an important determinant of political tolerance (Bobo and Licari, 1989; Golebiowska, 1995; Marquart-Pyatt and Paxton, 2007).
The second view emphasizes the connection between education and participation. Education provides civic skills and promotes political interests, which increase the likelihood of political participation (Brady et al., 1995). Early studies of voter turnout by Arneson (1925) and Gosnell (1927) noted that more educated individuals were more likely to cast a ballot. More recently, Glaeser et al. (2007) argued that since education is important in motivating support for groups that are primarily driven by peer persuasion rather than direct rewards, increases in education should work to favor pro-democracy groups rather than authoritarian ones. A positive association between education and political participation has been found in several works focused on the US (Brady et al., 1995; Dee, 2004) and in the comparative politics literature (Gallego, 2010; Glaeser et al., 2007).
The third perspective views increases in education as conducive to social equality. Measures of educational attainment are closely associated with income inequality. Several studies established this association: Park (1996) and De Gregorio and Lee (2002) found that the average years of education has a strong negative impact on income inequality; Boix and Stokes (2003) found that increases in economic equality (measured using farm ownership and literacy rates) increase both the chances of a democratic transition and the stability of democratic regimes.
There are also important challenges to the previous perspectives. For example, scholars have argued that democracies may be sustained by an informed elite even with low levels of tolerance among the population (Key, 1961), that increases in political participation may not favor democratic stability (Nordlinger, 1968), and that redistributive conflicts related to income inequality do not explain the emergence of many contemporary democracies (Keefer, 2009). More recently, Acemoglu et al. (2005) examined data from 104 countries from 1965 to 2000 and discovered that increases in education do not affect levels of democracy. The authors concluded that the cross-sectional relationship between education and democracy is driven by omitted factors influencing both education and democracy. Since this study, new research challenges the findings of Acemoglu et al. (2005) using a sample of fewer countries dating further in time (Murtin and Wacziarg, 2014) with alternative estimators and controls (Bobba and Coviello, 2007). However, these studies do not consider that null or weak findings may partly result from education having different effects in poor versus developed countries.