THE TREATMENT OF EDUCATION IN NATIONAL ACCOUNTING1

Dudley Seers and Richard Jolly

Review of Income and Wealth, 1966, vol. 12, issue 3, 195-209

Abstract: It is argued that the conventions of an accounting system, such as the S.N.A., are a matter of convenience. The treatment of education as a current expenditure, instead of as a form of capital formation, derives from the Keynesian system, and is not appropriate for dynamic problems of developing countries, where weaknesses in education are often the main “bottleneck” in the process of development. In such countries, expenditure on education clearly yields its benefits mainly in the longer run. To treat this as a consumption item biases policy in the direction of using financial resources for fixed capital rather than human investment, and may cause aid agencies to penalize countries which expand their educational systems. A similar problem arises on other expenditures such as health, but the case for treating them as investment is not so strong. To treat educational expenditure as part of capital formation logically requires two major changes. First education needs to be removed from private and public consumption, and for this purpose a fairly broad definition of what is education should be used. Secondly, the stock of educational capital should be valued. The valuation problems are, however, severe. Variations in cost components make historic cost of little value as a yardstick, and calculations of future returns are fraught with difficulties. Using replacement costs, which seems the best method, involves the construction of education profiles in physical terms which can then be valued by present or by standardised costs. The depreciation of human capital through mortality and retirement can be allowed for by applying national average rates to these physical profiles. Switching educational expenditure from current to capital accounts involves no serious practical problem. However, although there should logically be an allowance for depreciation on human capital, this is not recommended; single monetary measures of educational stock are not very meaningful, and this would involve changing the definition of “net” aggregates. Development of statistics of educational stocks and flows in physical terms—the beginnings of “demographic accounting” fully integrated with the rest of national accounting—is strongly advocated.

Date: 1966
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.1966.tb00721.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:revinw:v:12:y:1966:i:3:p:195-209

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0034-6586

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Income and Wealth is currently edited by Conchita D'Ambrosio and Robert J. Hill

More articles in Review of Income and Wealth from International Association for Research in Income and Wealth Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().