Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) effect on GDP in EU countries: Labor force perspective

Authors

  • Dayanat Ahmadov Institute of Scientific Research on Economic Issues

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v7i1.236

Keywords:

STEM, economic growth, productivity

Abstract

This paper analyzes the impact of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) workforce on GDP in EU countries as a proxy for what could happen in Azerbaijan. We first estimate the effect of STEM labor force, which is measured by number of workers in STEM occupations, on GDP in 28 EU countries for 1992-2015. We use STEM labor force as the basis for innovation and productivity in a country as opposed to educational attainment used mostly for developed countries. Then, we use the estimated marginal effects to quantify the potential contribution of STEM labor force on GDP per capita in Azerbaijan. It was found that adding 44,000 STEM jobs (28% increase) in STEM labor force in Azerbaijan, is predicted to cause $1944 increase in GDP per employee which corresponds to $1102 in GDP per capita approximately.

References

Augustine, N. R. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Retrieved March, 19, 2008. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.

Barro, R. J., & Lee, J.-W. (2015). Education matters: Global schooling gains from the 19th to the 21st century. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199379231.001.0001

Baumol, W. J., & Strom, R. J. (2007). Entrepreneurship and economic growth. Strategic entrepreneurship journal , 1(3-4), 233-237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.26

Cappelli, P. (2008). Schools of dreams more education is not an economic elixir. Issues in Science & Technology, 24(4), 59-64.

Cohen, W. M. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553

Cohen, Daniel and Marcelo Soto. 2007. “Growth and Human Capital: Good Data, Good Results.” Journal of Economic Growth (12): 51-76.

Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (1995). Learning by doing and learning from others: Human capital and technical change in agriculture. Journal of Political Economy, 103(6), 1176-1209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/601447

Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Van Reenen, J. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of economics and statistics, 86(4), 883-895. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/0034653043125194

Hartog, J. (2000). Human capital as an instrument of analysis for the economics of education. European Journal of Education, 35(1), 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-3435.00002

Kirby, D. (2007). Reviewing Canadian post-secondary education: Post-secondary education policy in post-industrial Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (65), 1-24.

Krueger, A. B., & Lindahl, M. (2001). Education for Growth: Why and for Whom. Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, 394, 1101-1136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.39.4.1101

Lucas Jr, R. E. (1993). Making a miracle. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 251-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2951551

Marginson, Simon, Russell Tytler, Brigid Freeman, and Kelly Roberts. 2013. “STEM: Country Comparisons: International Comparisons of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education.” Australian Council of Learned Academies: 1-178.

Mokyr, J. (2005). The intellectual origins of modern economic growth. The Journal of Economic History, 65(2), 285-351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050705000112

Murphy, K. M., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1991). The allocation of talent: Implications for growth. The quarterly journal of economics, 106(2), 503-530. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2937945

Nelson, R. R. (2005). Technology, institutions, and economic growth. Harvard University Press.

OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. 1998. Human Capital Investment: An International Comparison. Paris: OECD Publications.

OECD. (2013). Results: Ready to Learn-Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs (Volume III).

Romer, P. M. (1990, October). Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261725

Romer, P. M. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 3-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.1.3

Rosenberg, N. (2000). Schumpeter and the Endogeneity of Technology: Some American Perspectives. Graz Schumpeter Lectures, vol. 3. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203465356

Sianesi, Barbara, and John Van Reenen. 2002. “The Returns to Education: Macroeconomics.” Journal of Economic Surveys (17, no. 2): 157–200.

The State Students Admission Commission. (2015). Statistical and scientific analysis of 2015-2016 years results of student admission and general education exit exam. Baku: The State Students Admission Commission, Azerbaijan Republic.

Young, A. (1993). Invention and bounded learning by doing. Journal of political economy , 101(3), 443-472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261882

Zeev, N. B., Mokyr, J. & van der Beek, K. (2017). Flexible supply of apprenticeship in the British industrial revolution. The Journal of Economic History, 77(1), 208-250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050717000043

Published

2020-03-14

How to Cite

Ahmadov, D. (2020). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) effect on GDP in EU countries: Labor force perspective. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research (JEECAR), 7(1), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v7i1.236