| Traditional factor endowments theory emphasizes that trade patterns between two countries depends on the factor endowment differences. Comparative advantage comes from the relative abundant quantity of specific factors, which is the basis of international division of labor and international trade. With the development of society and economy and the changes of population and education policy, the original factor endowments between countries consistent with each other develop to the similar trend. Among developed countries, the differences in capital, technology and others are narrowing, take US and Japan for example. Among developing countries, differences in the overall level of labor skills or the average skill level of labor resources are gradually narrowing, take China and India for example. However, bilateral trade does not decrease because of these changes in the original factor endowments between countries.By examining the situation of labor education, we find that the difference of labor force average years of education between China and India is not very large. Similarly, labor force average years of education between US and Japan are almost the same. But there is a great difference between their labor skill structures calculated by years of education. In China and Japan, the difference between labor skills is relatively small. In China, illiterate labor and talented labor account for a small proportion. Japan has a large number of highly educated and a higher level of high-end skilled labor. In Japan, the mid-skilled labor force and skilled labor force account for a large proportion. In India and US, the difference between labor skills is relatively large. India’s illiteracy rate and the proportion of higher skilled personnel are higher than that of China. The difference between labor skills of the US is relatively large. US has a large number of talents, but also has a large number of low education level or low-end unskilled labor. Labor skill distribution is likely to the trend of polarization in US. The differences in the structure of the labor skills are likely to lead to the differences of countries’ comparative advantage on the basis of breakdown elements. For example, in the manufacturing sector, China and Japan show more obvious comparative advantages. Especially in the field of high-end manufacturing, Japan’s comparative advantage is more obvious. While in the software technology industry, financial modern service industries such as insurance, India and US show more obvious comparative advantages.Combined with relevant research in this field, first of all, this paper analyzes how labor skill distribution affects national comparative advantage. We summarize the influence mechanism of labor skill distribution on national comparative advantage. Assume that labor skill distribution is exogenous, and then we establish a theoretical model of labor skill distribution affecting national comparative advantages. We use bilateral trade data of the sub-industry of China and India from1995to2010to examine our theoretical conclusion with an empirical estimation. The estimate results are consistent with theoretical expectations that labor skill distribution which is based on the education level dose affect national comparative advantage.Secondly, this paper explores the determinants of labor skill distribution. Based on our preliminary demonstration that labor skill distribution does affect national comparative advantage, in order to give specific policy recommendations that can optimize the trade structure and improve the status of the international division of labor, we explore the determinants of labor skill distribution and summarize the influence mechanism from the aspects of demand side and supply side separately, which are based on the characteristics of the education system. At the supply side, the govenment, enterprises and individuals all have incentive to to provide and participate in education and training, which will affect national labor skill distribution. At the demand side, the employment and pricing mechanisms of the labor market and manufacturers demand for skills will affect national labor skill distribution too. We select typical countries-the United States and Japan combined with its education system to do case study based on these determinants. We compare different impact of manufacturers and personal choice on the overall skill level of national labor force and labor skill distribution under different education systems.Thirdly, we discuss about how education system affects labor skill distribution thereby national comparative advantage. Education and training plays very important roles in the process of human capital formation. As a further study, we relax the given assumption that labor skill distribution is exogenous and summarize the influence mechanisms of how education system affects labor skill distribution thereby national comparative advantage.With reference to Chang and Huang (2010), we summarize specific theoretical model. We select a few representative countries according to their economic development level, which is mainly based on real GDP per capita to do case study. We compare the degree of decentralization and centralization of education system, labor skill distribution and national comparative advantages of the above countries by doing case study to examine our expectation of relationship between education system, labor skill distribution and national comparative advantage. In addition, from the perspective of economic diversity development need, the characteristics of domestic regional division of labor and industry structure dynamic evolution in the future, China needs to find a balance between dispersed and centralized education system and a balance between dispersed and centralized labor skill distribution.Finally, we made a systematic summary. We believe that the distribution of labor skills does affect national comparative advantage. Education and training play very important roles in the process of human capital formation. Under different education systems, enterprises and individuals’choice affects overall labor force skill level and labor skill distribution of a country. Employment and pricing mechanism of labor market, as well as manufacturers demand for skills will also affect a country’s labor skill distribution. Objectively speaking, there is no exact good or bad judgement for centralized or decentralized education system or centralized or decentralized labor skill distribution. The most important thing is that both education system and labor skill distribution are suitable to our country’s economic and trade development strategy.China, as a developing country, we need to find a balance between autarky and openness. According to our future economic development strategy, we also need to find a balance between concentrated or dispersed education system and a balance between concentrated or dispersed labor skill distribution, which is based on our current and future development. In order to develop high-end manufacturing and high-tech industries and improve our innovation and R&D capabilities, we believe that neither the simple centralized or decentralized education system, nor the simple centralized or decentralized labor skill distribution are able to meet our current economic development goals. At the same time, taking into account China’s domestic regional division of labor and the dynamic evolution of industrial structure in the future, we believe that may be it’s appropriate to reflect regional differences in labor skill distribution. Education system should suitable to labor skill distribution. In the field of higher education and high-end training, an appropriate increase in the elastic of education mechanism is necessary. |
PDF Full Text Request