http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cya.2016.03.003
Paper Research
Access and use of financial markets for basic
education expenses
Acceso y uso de
los mercados financieros para el pago de los gastos de la educación básica
Kristiano Raccanello1
Laura Elena Carrillo Cubillas2
Mariana Guzmán Yerena3
1 El Colegio de
Tlaxcala A.C., Mexico
2 Galilei A.C.,
Puebla, Mexico
3 Deloitte, Mexico City, Mexico
Corresponding author: Kristiano Raccanello, email:
kristiano.raccanello@coltlax.edu.mx
Corresponding author:
Laura Elena Carrillo Cubillas, email: direccion@galileiac.org
Corresponding author:
Mariana Guzman Yerena, email:
yerena.mariana@gmail.com
Abstract
As a
result of the financial crisis of 2008, the macroeconomic adjustment has
affected Mexican homes through greater unemployment and a drop in purchasing
power. Moreover, families had to keep financing education costs, sometimes
going into debt in the formal or informal financial market. The hypothesis of
this article proposes that the access and use of formal and informal financial
products makes it possible to reduce financial problems associated to education
expenses at the basic education levels. The probit
model is estimated with a sample comprised of four hundred homes in the
municipality of San Pedro Cholula (state of Puebla). The results indicate that
a worsening in the work conditions and the loss of employment are associated to
a greater probability of facing financial difficulties. Likewise, the access to
the formal financial market allows reducing the probability of facing these
difficulties, whereas for the informal market the results are a function of the
characteristics of each financial intermediary.
Keywords: Educational financing, Private expense, Financial
markets, Mexico.
JEL classification: I22.
Resumen
A raíz de la crisis financiera del 2008,
el ajuste macroeconómico ha afectado a los hogares mexicanos a través de un
mayor desempleo y una caída del poder adquisitivo. También, las familias tenían
que seguir financiando los gastos en educación, a veces endeudándose en el
mercado financiero formal o informal. La hipótesis de este artículo propone que
el acceso y el uso de los productos financieros formales e informales permiten
reducir los problemas financieros asociados con los gastos escolares en los
niveles de educación básica. El modelo probit se estima con una muestra
constituida por cuatrocientos hogares que residen en el municipio de San Pedro
Cholula (estado de Puebla). Los resultados indican que un empeoramiento de las
condiciones laborales y la pérdida del empleo se asocian con una mayor
probabilidad de enfrentar dificultades financieras. Asimismo, el acceso al
mercado financiero formal permite reducir la probabilidad de enfrentar estas
dificultades, mientras que para el informal los resultados están en función de
las características de cada intermediario financiero.
Palabras clave: Financiamiento de la educación, Gasto privado,
Mercados financieros, México.
Códigos JEL: I22.
Received: 05/05/2015
Accepted: 17/03/2016
Background information
Education can be
considered in different ways: i) as a consumer good
that provides a benefit for the individuals without having any type of
incidence in productivity; ii) as a means to help identify and grade skills and
abilities; or iii) as a means to increase human capital ( Carrillo, 2006 ) which, in turn, is considered a
productive factor given the relation between the knowledge level of the workers
and their capacity to use them and by extension, their productivity ( Serrano, 1996 ). According to this last
perspective, the education cost is an investment that generates better living
conditions for the individual that receives it. In this sense, at an individual
level, education is a process that contributes to the development of each human
being, through which it is possible to access a higher income and better
services, while at a collective level there is a general consensus to consider
it as a lever for social development ( Marcel
& Tokman, 2005).
Regarding
the aforementioned, there is a close relation between the level of education
and the income level of the individuals ( Becker,
1964; Mincer, 1974 ), with evident intergenerational benefits associated
to the level of education and prosperity of future generations ( Hoyos, Martínez,
& Székely, 2010 ).
On the
other hand, it is known that in Mexico, the percentage of income allocated to
education decreases as the household income increases, with the exception of
the last ten percent ( Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía [INEGI],
2010 ); that is, “ education costs by the
poorest strata is significantly lower than that corresponding to the high
strata of society. However, (…) the low strata of society (…) focus their
expenses on the basic level, whereas the high strata do it on higher education”
(Bracho, 1995 : 2–3, citing Llamas,
1993). Similarly, it is observed that the people in households with a lower
income study fewer years and under worse conditions than those with higher
income ( Hochschild & Scovronick, 2004).
Education, human capital and economic results
The importance of education at the
individual level lies in being a permanent process that contributes to the
development of a person, as well as being the main means to obtain, convey and
enhance culture, and being a determining factor in the acquisition of knowledge
and personal development. Human capital, which according to Becker
(1964) is
defined as “ (…) the set of the productive
capacities that an individual acquires through the accumulation of general or
specific knowledge” , is
the bridge between education and work, with the latter being the culmination of
what was learned during the school years, strengthened by experience and daily
practice in the labor market.
The early years of life and the proper
development of people are essential for their development as productive
individuals. In these stages, the care of the parents, the access to a balanced
diet and medical service, as well as the possibility of obtaining timely and
quality education, make it possible for individuals, at an intergenerational
level, to achieve better standards of living through a virtuous circle ( Raccanello, 2012).
One of the manifestations through which this
aspect can be appreciated is the economic results of micro-enterprises, which,
in Mexico, represent 95.6% of the productive units and employ up to 45.6% of
the workforce ( Pavón, 2010 ); however, they only contribute with 15%
of the Gross Domestic Product ( Secretariat
of Economy, 2010 ). In this regard, it is understood that
as the level of education of the microentrepreneur
increases, operating profits gradually increase when compared to those with
only primary education,1 concluding that “ with a higher level of
education it is expected for the microentrepreneur to
have skills that, along with a better understanding of the issues, will allow
them to analyze and make better decisions that result in positive results for
the microenterprise” (Raccanello & Saucedo, 2015 :17). These results are
also supported by the data published by PROMÉXICO (2014)2 and the
Economic Databank (INEGI, 2014 ), where the
correlation between the average school years per state with the productivity
index is of 68.9%, and with regard to the average of the gross income per
economic activity it is of 41.5% for manufacture and 39% for commerce and
services.
Education in Mexico
In the face of the results that have
evidenced the shortcomings of the Mexican educational system at an
international level ( OCDE, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2009 ), this has been the target of an
important reform approved in December 2012 and enacted in February 2013.
Even when it is still too soon to be able
to determine the impact of the educational reform, the measures taken by the
State before the reform already reflected an increase in the gross enrollment
rate (or coverage)3 in primary and secondary education (Secretariat of
Public Education [ SEP, for its acronym
in Spanish], 2010 ), where for basic education the figures reported by
the SEP indicate that at a national level, during the 1990–1991 school cycle,
there was a 95.9% coverage for the primary level, which increased to 98.6% for
the 2009–2010 school cycle. Furthermore, at the secondary level, considering
that in the 1990–1991 school cycle this was not obligatory, the national
coverage increased from 68% to 95.3% (2009–2010 school cycle).
According to the figures published by the UNESCO
(2010a), in
2009 the net rate4 of school enrollment at the primary level was of 93.9%
(children between 6 and 12 years of age), 67.2% for secondary (teenagers
between 12 and 15 years of age), but only 25.7% of young people enrolled in
preparatory. These percentages reflect that the higher the level of education,
the greater the difference between the gross rate and the net rate of
enrollment, that is, the percentage of the population enrolled that does not
comply with the corresponding age of that academic level is greater.
Additionally, it must be noted that secondary education and middle school are
still not attainable for an significant sector of the population and many young
people that join these school levels drop out5 and do not finish
their studies (SEP, 2011).
Causes
of school dropouts
The literature that has analyzed the
causes associated to school dropouts indicates that they are mainly due to the
lack of financial resources to cover the direct (enrollment and tuition fees)
and indirect (work materials, uniforms and transport) costs of attending
school, as well as the perception of a low educational quality ( Baschieri & Falkingham,
2007; Ersado, 2005; Morrisson,
2002; Rosati & Rossi, 2007; Rumberger,
1995; Yuren, de la Cruz, Cruz, Araújo-Olivera,
and Estrada, 2005 ). Those students who have lesser
abilities are the most likely to drop out of school ( Bacolod
and Ranjan, 2008 ), and having work activities could also
affect attendance, school results and, ultimately, the permanence at the
educational institution ( Basu & Van, 1998; Basu, 1999; Beegle, Dehejia, & Gatti, 2005 ;
Bhalotra, 2007; Edmonds & Pavcnik,
2005; Gunnarsson, Orazem,
& Sánchez, 2006; Orazem & Gunnarsson,
2003 ).
The financial crisis that hit the global
economy in 2008 has modified the distribution of national budgets. According to
the UNESCO (2011) , several of the poorest countries in the
world have had their plans for education funding affected, having to adjust
their objectives for 2015. In Mexico, the percentage of GDP allocated to
education increased from 4.7% for 2006–2007 to 4.9% in 2008, to reach 5.2% in
the three-year period of 2009–2011 ( UNESCO,
2010a ).
Despite this increase, the lack of employment and the loss of purchasing power
due to the financial crisis could generate pressure and financial trouble in
households. Although education costs are the result of a process of resource
allocation that reflects a structure of priorities and social, family and
individual objectives ( Bracho, 1995 ), it should also take into consideration
the economic resources available in the household.
For this, the financial crisis of 2008
resulted in a reduced growth of the GDP (1.2%), when compared to the previous
year (3.3% in 2007), but with a drop in 2009 (−6.1%) followed by a partial
recovery (5.5%) in 2010 ( Banco de México, 2011 ). The drop in production was followed by
an increase in the inflation that decreased the purchasing power of the wages
and by an increase in the open unemployment rate (OUR) mainly in 2009, same
which in 2010 still did not manage to go back to the levels prior to the
crisis. This increase in the OUR affected both genders; for men, it increased
from 3.9% (2008) to 5.5% (2009), settling at 5.4% for 2010. Similarly, for
women, it went from 4.1% in 2008 to 5.5% (2009), settling at 5.4% for 2010 ( Botello, 2011 ). In addition to an increase in
unemployment, the employed population observed lower wages ( Botello, 2011 ; Table 6). Due to the above, it could be
anticipated that these adjustments affect families at a macroeconomic level,
especially if the one providing resources to the household lost their
employment or, if they managed to relocate, depending on the new labor
conditions.
This article associates the effects of the
financial crisis with having faced some difficulty to cover the expenses of
education; a situation that has already been addressed by the UNESCO
(2010b) in
its “ Education for all Global
Monitoring Report” when
observing a reduction in the resources allocated to this sector, despite the
fact that the cost per student in primary and secondary school shows an upward
trend in the years following the financial crisis ( UNESCO,
2010a ).
An explanation for this tendency is that the households could have resorted to
formal or informal credit markets to pay for these expenses, in this sense, The
National Survey on Financial Inclusion ( SHCP,
CNBV, & INEGI, 2012 ) presents some evidence. Despite expenses
in education being grouped in the “ education or health expenses ”
category, which makes it impossible to isolate the interest variable, from the
38.6% of the population that had saved in the past year (2011), only 29.55%
allocated these resources to education or health expenses. In the same manner,
35.96% applied for informal credits, of which 32.93% also allocated that money
to education (or health) expenses. Regarding formal financing, 30.76% used the
loaned money for this same purpose.
In addition to the above, Bray
(2007)
indicates that the expense in education can be divided into: i) opportunity costs, those activities that the individuals
or families stop doing to invest in education, and ii) monetary expenses that
can be done “inside” (collaborations and school fees) and “outside” of the
school (purchase of uniforms, stationary, transport and paperwork). In the
educational systems of industrialized countries, the expenses “inside” the
school are fully covered by the government and the expenses “outside” the
school comprise a small portion of the total expense of the households ( Santibáñez, Campos, & Jarillo, 2011 ). However, in countries where the capacity
of the state to finance public education is limited, families have to try to
co-finance the education of their members ( OECD
and UNESCO, 2002).
In relation to Puebla, which is the state
that is the object of this article, it is listed as the sixth state with the
lowest school attendance; on average, its inhabitants have 7.9 years of
education (below the national average: 8.7 years), and has high levels of
dropouts for the primary (1.2%) and secondary school (4.7%) levels ( SEP,
2012 ).
Particularly, for the municipality of San Pedro Cholula, where the empirical
study was carried out, a greater number of dropouts than those at a state level
can be observed, both for primary and secondary school, with 1.3% and 5.2%,
respectively ( SEP, 2012).
Formal and informal
credits
The access and use of financial services
can provide an improvement of the well-being of the households. In particular,
through this access, households are able to “ (…) mobilize savings, receive credits, manage risks and participate in
the payment systems” (CNBV,
2009),
whereas the use component will be determined by the
percentage of the population that uses some of these products or services.
However, not all the population uses these services, and it is this population
that is considered to be financially excluded, representing an important
potential market for informal financial intermediaries.
In this sense, the National Commission for
the Protection and Defense of Financial Service Users (CONDUSEF for its acronym
in Spanish) indicates that:“( …) for most of the Mexican population there are two financial systems,
formal and informal. The first tends to be almost always out of reach; the
second is where most of the financial activity is carried out, and is usually
developed in an area without supervision that is unobserved with regard to
records and official statistics” (CONDUSEF,
2013 ),
arguing that informal financial activity is an important source of credit
comprised mainly by moneylenders and pawnshops.
In 2009, according to the First Financial
Inclusion Report (CNVB, 2009), Puebla was the third state with the least
municipalities that had bank branches, and the second with the least
municipalities with ATMs. Similarly, it was the seventh state with the least
debit card users (43%).
In the municipality of San Pedro Cholula,
with regard to the use of formal credit, there were 0.81 bank branches and the
same ratio of ATMs, as well as 40 sale points per ten thousand adults ( CNBV,
2010 ).
Furthermore, 28.52% of the financially active population had a debit card and
4.35% had a credit card. The comparative study between the state of Puebla and
the national average6 indicates that this
municipality had an inferior coverage regarding the access and use of formal
credit ( CNBV, 2010:302).
Under these premises, the main objective
of this study is to analyze if the difficulties of the households to pay for
the education of their children lessen with the access and use of the formal
and informal credit markets, considering the changes in the employment
situation of the heads of the households in an environment that is subject to
the repercussions of the financial crisis of 2008. To this end, the hypothesis
of this work is that the use and access to financing sources, formal and
informal, lessens the problems to afford education costs.
Data and methodology
Data
From a demographic of 62 primary schools (40 public and 22 private) in
the municipality of San Pedro Cholula, the institutions were selected through a
two-stage cluster systematic sampling with an elevation coefficient of 4 for
the sampling of the private institutions and a value of 8 for the public ones,
with the objective of randomly selecting 5 schools of each conglomerate. Once
the schools were defined, 400 primary school students were selected through a
simple probabilistic sampling and subsequently a survey was applied to one of
the adults (preferably the parents) of the corresponding households. The
gathering of information was carried out between the months of January and June
of 2011; the capture of data was finalized in December of the same year.
Survey
The instrument comprised of 51
multiple-choice and dichotomous closed reagents organized into three sections:
a) socio-economic aspects of the household (marital status and education of the
parents, people that contribute with their income regularly and irregularly,
assets, income, savings and house debts); 2) information regarding the children
in the household (school level, school they attend, scholarships); and 3)
financing mechanisms (access, use and characteristics of the formal and
informal financing sources).
Descriptive
statistics
According to the results of the survey,
the majority of the households of the sample are comprised by couples (84.75%,
though only 69% declared being married), with an average of four inhabitants
per household (40%) and two children (42.75%). The majority of the parents have
a preparatory (46.48% of the fathers and 39.80% of the mothers) or secondary
(24.62% and 31.74%, respectively) maximum level of education.
As for the financial aspects, 49.25% of
households only have one member that contributes to their income regularly, and
irregular contributions were detected in 17% of cases. In addition to the
foregoing, the income level of the households is low; 59% of the sample
observes up to 4 minimum wages (less than 6317 pesos per month) and 23.25%
observes between 5 and 7 minimum wages (between 6317 and 11,053 pesos).
On the other hand, more than half of the
households (51.25%) do not have savings and 33.25% has accumulated less than
11,369 pesos. These figures represent very limited funds in the event of a
contingency. Regarding debts, 73.75% of respondents stated having debts between
3001 and 25,000 pesos; the percentages are gradually reduced for greater
amounts. Additionally, only 21% of respondents that stated having a credit card
or a department store credit card, indicated having problems paying their
balances in 2008, a percentage that increases to 36.75% and 52.75% in the
following years (2009 and 2010, respectively). This tendency follows the
worsening of the financial crisis and unemployment rate during those years.
Regarding work activities, the majority of
the household parents are wage earners from the private sector (40.75%),
self-employed (28%) and, to a lesser extent, some work in the public sector
(19.75%). In the last year, 74% remained in the same job, sometimes having to
accept changes in their work conditions (7.25%) or incorporating another
activity to complement the level of income (6.5%). Of the remaining, 10.5% lost
their job, managing to relocate to another job (6%), or remained unemployed
(4.5%) until the date of the survey.
The situation of mothers is a little bit
different due to the fact that the majority of them are homemakers (30.5%), or
they work in the public sector (16%). A smaller percentage of women, in
relation to men, has remained in their same job (56.25%), having accepted
changes in their work conditions (4.5%). A greater percentage of women, in
relation to men, that incorporate other work activities to complement their
income (13%) is also noted. The percentage of women who lost their job was of
8.25%, and only 2.5% managed to relocate to another job, while 5.75% remained
unemployed.
It was found that in the surveyed
households there was one (33%), two (40.25%), or three (21.75%) children who
are currently in school. The data reveal that the percentage of those children
who attend private school decreases as the number of children per household
increases. This is possibly due to the financial burden that having kids in
these institutions represents. In relation to this, 36.25% of households state that they had problems paying the costs of
education during the 2010–2011 school cycle, trying to cover said costs by borrowing
money from family (48.97%), participating in a group savings pool (15.86%), or
financing them with credit cards (13.10%). In relation to these problems,
minors only stopped attending school in 1.38% of the cases, while 2.78% had to
incorporate some type of paid work to their academic activities.
Methodology
In order to be able to prove the
hypothesis of this work a probit
model was estimated, with robust standard errors, in which the dependent
variable problem2010_2011 takes the value of 1 if the household had
financial problems paying the education of their children during the 2010–2011
school year, and 0 if this was not the case. The coefficients represent the
marginal changes, if they are significant and positive (negative), whether or
not they have problems paying for the education of their children. The
descriptions of each of the independent variables included in the model are
presented in Table A.1 of the annex.
Results
According to the Hosmer–Lemeshow test, the model adjusts well to the data ( p = 0.7616),
and this specification allows to correctly classify 84.5% of the observations
of the dependent variable ( Table 1).
According to the
estimations, the problems for the payment of education present an inertial
behavior: if the household had difficulties paying the education costs of the
2009–2010 school cycle, the probability of the problem reoccurring on the
following school cycle is of 42%; whereas if the problem occurred two cycles
before (2008–2009), though lower, the probability remains relatively high
(20.8%). Evidently, this situation reflects a certain degree of vulnerability
of the households that do not manage to eliminate this problem completely, despite
the passage of time.
Although
the levels of education of both parents were included in the model, only those
of the mother are associated to the problems regarding the payment of
education. With regard to those of them who have a university degree, these
problems are verified with a higher probability (11.9%) in the cases where the
mothers have a middle level of education, probably due to a deficient
management of resources. However, if they have a primary or lower school level,
the probability of presenting this problem decreases to a 26.9%. This behavior
can be explained through the preferences of the parents when selecting the type
of institution that their children will attend. If the mothers have low
education levels, they could send their children to public schools, where the
costs of education are lower and the financial commitment is also easier to
meet. In all estimated models throughout this research, the coefficient
associated to this variable has always presented a negative sign (significant
at 1%). An analysis of the sample information showed that from 30 households
where the mother had this education level, 27 of them had their kids attending
a public school, which supports the aforementioned interpretation.
On the
other hand, none of the income variables turned out to be statistically
significant, and therefore no association between these and the problems in
paying for the education of the children was detected. As a matter of fact, it
seems that the households with the lowest incomes tend to have fewer problems
with regard to the payment of school costs, possibly because they select public
institutions within their budgets. Despite this, the aspects related to the
financial stability of a household are important. For each individual that
contributes with irregular income to the household, there is a 22.1% higher
probability of having problems paying the education of the children in said
household, and in this same manner, when the household has assets, or uses
services that involve regular payments for their use (vehicle, telephone, and
cable), a lower probability of having these types of financial difficulties
(28.2%, 5.8% and 15.6%, respectively) is observed.
Regarding
debt in the households, concerning amounts lower than 3000 pesos, the
immediately superior ranges (3001–6000 and 6001–15,000 pesos) are also not
statistically significant, which suggests that they are financial obligations
that the households are able to manage. However, amounts greater than 15,000
pesos are strongly associated to problems in the household to pay for the
education of the children, as the marginal changes vary between 42 and 55.7%,
depending on the range of debt.
Due to
the fact that the costs that the households confront are related to the number
of children, their school level, and the type of institution (private or
public) they attend, the model included the number of children enrolled by
level and type of educational institution.
The
estimations indicated that for each child enrolled in a private school at the
nursery or preschool level, the probability of facing these problems increases
by 26.1%, and for those attending primary school in public or private
institutions, the probability is of 12.3% and 31.4%, respectively.
Similarly,
if on the one hand we consider that private institutions are more expensive
compared to public institutions, which reflects on marginal changes, we can
also acknowledge that the majority of households with children in primary
school or lower educational levels are comprised by younger couples, who could
face greater financial problems that tend to decrease with time. This is
because at a secondary level, for each student enrolled in a public institution,
the probability decreases by 17.2% (for children in secondary school at a
private institution a decrease in the probability is also detected, but it is
not significant).
Although
the study focused on households with children who are studying at a basic
educational level, the variables corresponding to higher educational levels
were included because some other members of the family were enrolled in them.
In general, it can be observed that the probability of presenting problems to
cover the payments related to the education of the family members at the lower
educational levels tends to decrease regardless of the type of institution,
though none of the variables were significant. This result is possible because
only the households with a better financial situation are able to push the
education of their children forward.
Although
it would be expected for scholarships to reduce financial problems, according
to the estimations, said scholarships present a weak association and only for
students enrolled in private schools at the preparatory and university levels.
These educational levels offered by private institutions are usually the most
expensive, and those households that apply for scholarships do so due to
financial difficulties. In this case, the positive relation between the amount
of the scholarships and the problems in paying the costs of education of the
children would indicate that these aids are being assigned to households that
actually need them.
The
analyzing of the variables that correspond to the access and use of the formal
financial sector – measured through having a credit or debit card – yields the
fact that the possession of bank cards allows users to reduce the possibilities
of having difficulties to pay the education costs of their children. In
particular, the access to a line of credit is associated to a greater reduction
(−42%), as it is a source of available resources in case of need. Savings,
though these are relatively low according to the results of the survey, also
contribute to reduce the probability, but they do so to a lesser extent
(−12.4%).
Regarding
the use of financial support, bank loans present a similar behavior, but they
only reduce probability marginally (0.1% for every 1000 pesos in funding).
Despite the small reduction, these results suggest that financial inclusion,
mainly through the availability of financial savings and credit instruments, is
associated to a smaller probability that the household will face difficulties
in paying the costs derived from the school activities of their children.
However, considering the use of informal loans, it is observed that if the
funds are loaned by family, there is a 1.64% drop in probability is associated
for every 1000 pesos.
Regarding
the foregoing, loans by family members may be provided more readily when
compared to a bank, and are therefore more effective than the latter with
regard to the financial needs in the household. This interpretation also allows
explaining the 4.56% increase of probability if the resources (1000 pesos) have
been obtained through a group savings pool, in which the money is given by the
assigned “turn” and therefore does not coincide with the moment in which the
need arises. Likewise, participating in a group savings pool implies having to
provide periodic contributions for its entire duration. In this manner, forced
savings can contribute to the financial problems of the household.
As for
the changes in the work conditions, it was found that for the father of the
household, having lost his work and remaining unemployed, or having found
another job with a lower wage during the 2010–2011 school cycle, even if the
changes are only slightly significant, are associated with a high probability
of problems in paying the costs of education (28.5% and 49.3%, respectively).
For
most households, the decision to enroll their children in school is made
mid-spring and is settled some months before the school cycle (August–June).
Once the children are enrolled, sudden changes in financial stability due to
the loss of employment—considering the acquired financial obligations—force the
household to re-assign the family budget considering their new problematic.
This is reflected in the model through the magnitude of the estimated marginal
changes.
Finally,
despite the fact that most of the variables that represent the changes in the
work situation of the mother having positive signs, none of them are
statistically significant, which, at least in the municipality where the study
was carried out, could be due to the fact that their participation in the
finances of the household may not be as relevant as that of their male
counterpart.
Conclusions
According to the results of this work, since
the financial and unemployment crisis, households that have access to the
formal financial market manage to significantly reduce their problems to cover
the costs of education. Similarly, the financing mechanisms tend to reduce the
probability of having problems in covering the costs of education, though their
specific characteristics must be taken into consideration.
In this manner and once again addressing
the fact that education is one of the means through which individuals are able
to access higher levels of income, and knowing that a greater preparation of
the microentrepreneur is positively associated to the
operative profits of the micro-enterprises, the access and the use of the
financial services can also have an important role in the accumulation of human
capital and its relation to the results of the productive units in Mexico.
Even if the existence of inertia was
detected in the probability of having problems to cover the costs of
education—which evidences that this difficulty is not short-term—, the problem
seems to lie more on the lack of financial stability and not so much in the low
levels of income of the household. This result may derive from the fact that
the payment of education costs is a long-term commitment for the family and as such,
if the family achieves a financially stable household, the probability that it
will have problems to cover the cost of education is lower. In this sense,
debts (especially when they are greater to 15,000 pesos) comprise a financial
load that is difficult to handle and which is associated to greater problems
related to the payment of other expenses.
Lastly, it was also observed that the
effects of the financial crisis are reflected in a greater probability to face
problems regarding the payment of the education costs of children, particularly
when the father is unemployed or when he receives a lower wage despite having
relocated to a new job.
One final observation: Households face
different types and magnitudes of expenses so that their children are able to
access education, which depends on the type of institution selected (public or
private). It is well-known that attending a public institution represents a
smaller financial effort when compared to a private one. However, lower costs
are also associated to a lower income, as households with fewer resources
select the cheaper educational option. In addition to the enrollment fee and
tuition, which probably comprise the greatest difference between public and
private education, there are other common items between the two (school
supplies and uniforms). For such purposes, state governments look to eliminate
these costs by providing free school supplies and uniforms to the students at
the basic levels. Other benefits that students from public schools receive can
be tablets or other learning tools.
The costs associated to geographical
aspects (route, distance between school and home, transport, and transportation
time), and to the model and quality (excursions, ad-hoc materials) of the
offered education service, are identified. The discounts that some private
schools offer when two or more siblings are enrolled are no less important; a
situation that also allows parents to save time. Lastly, there are costs
associated to the presents given to the teachers in one or more occasions
throughout the school cycles, motivated by social reasons and tradition.
Due to the fact that educational programs
are particularly dynamic, parents are continually exposed to new and
differentiated academic options. Considering that the experiences of the
parents in this educational service market are generally modest, they become
the buyers of a service not consumed directly by themselves. The scarce
knowledge of the progenitors about these aspects may cause the student to
change school or educational program, which, again, could result in higher
costs. Some of these aspects have not been considered in this work, but they
may serve as guidelines to explore new research hypotheses to be analyzed in
future investigations.
Annex
See Table A.1.
References
Bacolod, M. P., & Ranjan,
P. (2008). Why children work, attend school, or stay idle: the roles of ability
and household wealth. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 56(4),
791–828. http://doi.org/10.1086/588165
Banco de México (2011). Informe anual. México D.F. Accessed August 2014:
http://www.banxico.org.mx/publicaciones-y-discursos/publicaciones/informes-periodicos/anual/%7BF3075A61-2EF3-E85B-5A1CE8DE4BA3FB2C%7D.pdf.
Baschieri, A., & Falkingham, J. (2007). Staying
in School: Assessing the Role of Access, Availability and Opportunity Cost.
S3RI Application and Policy Working Paper no. A07/02. University of
Southampton.
Basu, K., & Van,
P. H. (1998). The economics of child labour.
The American Economic Review, 88(3), 412–427.
Basu, K. (1999). Child labour: Cause, consequence, and cure, with remarks on
international labour standards. Journal of
Economic Literature, 37(3), 1083–1119.
http://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226041223.001.0001
Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical
analysis with special reference to education. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Beegle, K., Dehejia, R., & Gatti, R.
(2005). Why Should We Care about Child Labour? The
Education, Labour Market, and Health Consequences of
Child Labour. World Bank Policy Research Working
Paper no. 3479. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Bhalotra, S. (2007). Is child work necessary? Oxford Bulletin of Economics
and Statistics, 69(1), 29–55. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2006.00435.x
Botello Triana, J. (2011). Algunos indicadores
del mercado del trabajo. Análisis Económico, XXVI(63),
247–263.
Bracho, T. (1995). Gasto privado en educación.
México, 1984-1992. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 57(2), 91–119.
http://doi.org/10.2307/3541071
Bray, M. (2007). The shadow education system: private tutoring and
its implications for planners (2nd edition). Paris: UNESCO, International Institute
for Educational Planning.
Carrillo, M. (2006). La Teoría y la Promoción
del Desarrollo Regional Sustentable. México: Benemérita Universidad
Autónoma de Puebla.
Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores [CNBV].
(2009). Primer Reporte de Inclusión Financiera. México, DF: CNBV.
Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores [CNBV].
(2010). Segundo Reporte de Inclusión Financiera. México, DF: CNBV.
Comisión Nacional para la Protección y Defensa
de los Usuarios de Servicios Financieros [CONDUSEF] (2013). El sistema
financiero informal. México D.F. Accessed: August 2013. http://www.condusef.gob.mx/index.php/instituciones-financieras/otros-sectores/casas-de-empeno/519-el-sistema-financiero-informal
De Hoyos, R., Martínez, J. M., & Székely, M. (2010). Educación y movilidad social en
México. Movilidad social en México. Población, desarrollo y crecimiento.
México DF: Centro de Estudios Espinosa Yglesias.
Edmonds, E. V., & Pavcnik, N. (2005).
Child labour in the global economy. The Journal of
Economic Perspective, 19(1), 199–220.
Ersado, L. (2005). Child labour and schooling decision in urban and rural areas:
Comparative evidence from Nepal, Peru, and Zimbabwe. World Development, 33(3),
455–480.
Gunnarsson, V., Orazem, P. F., & Sánchez, M. A.
(2006). Child labour and school achievement in Latin
America. The World Bank Economic Review, 20(1), 31–54.
Hochschild, J. L., & Scovronick, N. B. (2004). The
American dream and the public schools. Oxford University Press.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía
[INEGI] (2010). Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares 2010.
Microdatos. Accessed April 2013:
http://www.inegi.org.mx/est/contenidos/proyectos/accesomicrodatos/encuestas/hogares/regulares/enigh/2010tradicional/.
Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía
[INEGI]. (2014). Banco de Información Económica. Encuesta mensual base 2008
de Manufactura, Comercio y Servicios. Aguascalientes.
Marcel, M., & Tokman,
C. (2005). ¿Cómo se financia la educación en Chile? Santiago de Chile:
Gobierno de Chile, Ministerio de Hacienda.
Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, experience and earnings. New York: Columbia University Press.
Morrisson, C. (2002). Health, Education and Poverty Reduction. Policy Brief
no.19, OECD Development Centre. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development.
OCDE/PISA (2000). Programa Internacional de Evaluación
de los Alumnos de la OCDE. Accessed February 2013:
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/.
OCDE/PISA (2003). Programa Internacional de Evaluación de los Alumnos de la OCDE. Accessed February 2013:
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/.
OCDE/PISA (2006). Programa Internacional de Evaluación de los Alumnos de la OCDE. Accessed February 2013:
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/.
OCDE/PISA (2009). Programa Internacional de Evaluación de los Alumnos de la OCDE. Accessed Febraury 2013:
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/.
OECD and UNESCO (2002). Financing Education: Investments and Returns:
Analysis of the World Education Indicators 2002. Paris: OECD Publishing
& UNESCO Publishing.
Orazem, P., & Gunnarsson, V. (2003). Child Labour,
School Attendance, and Performance: A Review. Working paper, International Labour Office & International Programme
on the Elimination of Child Labour, Geneva.
Pavón, L. (2010). Financiamiento a las
microempresas y las pymes en México (2000-2009). Serie financiamiento del desarrollo
no. 226. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL-Naciones Unidas.
PROMÉXICO. (2014). Selección de indicadores de
inversión y comercio. Accessed April
2015:
http://mim.promexico.gob.mx/wb/mim/seleccion de indicadores.
Raccanello, K. (2012).
Salud, educación y nutrición: una revisión de la literatura en el marco de los
Objetivo de Desarrollo del Milenio. In P. Nelida Asili (Ed.), Vida Sustentable (pp. 364–390). UDLAP.
Raccanello, K., &
Saucedo Carranza, C. B. (2015). Microempresas y microcréditos en la ciudad de
Puebla. Perspectivas: Revista de Análisis de Economía, Comercio y Negocios
Internacionales, 9(1), 5–27.
Rosati, F. C., & Rossi, M.
(2007). Impact of school quality on child labour
and school attendance: The Case of CONAFE Compensatory Education Program in Mexico.
Understanding Children’s Work (UCW) Project.
Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of
students and schools. American Educational Research
Journal, 32(3), 583–625.
http://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003583
Santibáñez, L., Campos, M., & Jarillo, B.
(2011). 10 puntos para entender el gasto educativo en México:
Consideraciones sobre su eficiencia. México Evalúa. Accessed
March 2013:
http://www.mexicoevalua.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/MEX EVA-INHOUS-GASTO
EDU-LOW.pdf.
Secretaría de Educación Pública [SEP] (2010). Sistema
de Indicadores Educativos (INDISEP). México D.F.
Secretaría de Educación Pública [SEP] (2011). Sistema
de Indicadores Educativos (INDISEP). México D.F.
Secretaría de Educación Pública [SEP] (2012). Principales
cifras e indicadores educativos para el ciclo escolar 2011-2012. México
D.F.
Secretaría de Economía [SE] (2010). Microempresas.
México, D.F.: Secretaría de Economía.
Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público [SHCP],
Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores [CNBV] & Instituto Nacional de
Estadística y Geografía [INEGI] (2012). Encuesta Nacional de Inclusión
Financiera 2012 [ENIF]. México D.F.
Serrano, L. (1996). Indicadores de Capital
Humano y Productividad. Revista de Economía Aplicada, IV(10),
177–190.
UNESCO. (2010a). World
Data on Education. VII Ed. 2010/11. UIS Statistics in Brief. Accessed February 2013:
http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=121&IF
Language=eng&BR Country=4840.
UNESCO. (2010b). Informe de Seguimiento de la
Educación para Todos en el Mundo. Accessed February 2013:
http://www.unesco.org/new/es/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/.
UNESCO. (2011). Informe de Seguimiento de la
Educación para Todos en el Mundo. Accessed February 2013:
http://www.unesco.org/new/es/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/.
Yuren, T., de la Cruz,
M., Cruz, A., Araújo-Olivera, S. S., & Estrada,
M. J. (2005). Mundo de la Vida versus habitus
Escolar: El Caldo de Cultivo del Rezago Educativo en un México de
Migrantes. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 13(13). Accessed June 2010: http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n13/.
Notes.
1 Secondary: +1,188 pesos; Preparatory: +1,447 pesos; University: +2,332 pesos.
2 Main investment and
commerce indicators of the States of Mexico (2014).
3 The gross enrollment
rate (coverage) is calculated as follows: [(total enrollment of an educational level,
regardless of age)/(total population with the age that
corresponds to the educational level)] × 100.
4 The net rate of
enrollment is calculated as follows: [(enrollment corresponding to the age
range of an educational level)/(total population with
the age that corresponds to the educational level)] × 100.
5 Dropout in primary
school (2009–2010): 0.9%; Dropout in secondary school (2009–2010): 6.2%;
Dropout in middle education (2009–2010): 15.6% (SEP, 2011).
6 1.77 branches per ten
thousand adults.
Métricas de artículo
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Enlaces refback
- No hay ningún enlace refback.
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional.
CONTADURÍA Y ADMINISTRACIÓN, año 69, 2024, es una publicación trimestral editada por la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Colonia Ciudad Universitaria, Delegación Coyoacán, C.P. 04510, México, Ciudad de México, a través de la División de Investigación de la Facultad de Contaduría y Administración - UNAM, Circuito Exterior, s/n, Colonia Ciudad Universitaria, Delegación Coyoacán, C.P. 04510, México, Ciudad de México., Tel. (55) 56 22 84 57 y (55) 56 22 84 58 Ext. 144, http://www.cya.unam.mx, correo electrónico: revista_cya@fca.unam.mx, Editor responsable: Dr. Francisco López Herrera, Reserva de Derechos al Uso Exclusivo No. 04-2016-071316434900-203, otorgada por el Instituto Nacional del Derecho de Autor, ISSN 2448-8410, Responsable de la última actualización de este Número, División de Investigación de la Facultad de Contaduría y Administración-UNAM, Dr. Francisco López Herrera, Circuito Exterior, s/n, Colonia Ciudad Universitaria, Delegación Coyoacán, C.P. 04510, México, Cd., Mx., fecha de última modificación, 7 de enero de 2019.
Las opiniones expresadas por los autores no necesariamente reflejan la postura del editor de la publicación. Se autoriza la reproducción total o parcial de los textos aquí publicados siempre y cuando se cite la fuente completa y la dirección electrónica de la publicación.
Contaduría y Administración by División de Investigación de la Facultad de Contaduría y Administración is licensed under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento- 4.0 Internacional.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://www.cya.unam.mx.
Correo electrónico: revista_cya@fca.unam.mx
ISSN: 0186-1042 (Print) 2448-8410 (Online)