positive relation (Table 8);19 however, it shows differences among education level and economic sector. Schady (2000) estimated a return between 0.11 and 0.15 for male wage earners in the Philippines. It means that an additional year of education is related with an increase in income between 11% and 15%. However, the returns are different between education levels, but also depend on a country‟s development level, the structure of the labour market and economic productivity. In the case of tertiary education the effect is between 16% and 20%, in comparison with 6%-9% for primary education. In the case of household income, Jollife (2002) estimates a return of an additional year of education (households‟ maximum level of education) between 4% and 5%, but with clear differences between farm and off-farm incomes (household‟s median level of education). Table 8: International evidence of the returns on education Effect Country Return to education for male wage earners: Philippines Mean: [0.110 , 0.148] Primary education: [0.062 , 0.094] Secondary education: [0.060 , 0.100] Tertiary education: [0.162 , 0.196] Return to education for households: Total income: [0.037 , 0.052] Farm income: [0.069 , 0.118] Off-farm income: [0.185 , 0.250]
Ghana
Source Schady, 2000
Jolliffe, 2002
2.3. Behavioural Effects: Child Well-being Children represent the majority of the poor, being highly deprived in monetary and nonmonetary dimensions of well-being (Minujin and Shailen, 2012). Children growing up in poor families are disadvantaged in many areas. For example, the chances that they get appropriate health care or obtain appropriate schooling are lower compared to children from non-poor families. Furthermore child deprivation in dimensions as nutrition has a direct effect on other dimensions (e.g. on education due to lower ability to learn), and then reduces the opportunities to overcome poverty in the future (UNICEF, 2000 and 2012). Child poverty and vulnerability affect the quality of life and reinforce intergenerational poverty transmission, but they also affect the quantity of life as child mortality rates are closely related with the level of poverty (Barrientos and DeJong, 2004 and 2006). Child well-being is an important factor for the socio-economic development of a country as it determines the capacity of the future generations. It is a multidimensional concept including both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. The potential effects of social protection are crucial from a human rights perspective, but also for socio-economic development. The Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes the right to benefit from social protection and an adequate living standard for children‟s physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. Social protection increases child well-being (Table 9), promotes human development, breaks the intergenerational transmission of poverty, and increases future 19
Additional estimations can be found in Bennell (1998), Psacharopoulos and Patrinos (2002) and Schultz (2003). 36