Higher education as a differentiated product: structural changes in the demand model
Abstract
Object. Market for higher education services undergo several transformations for the last 20 years now: development of commercial education, changes in the principal of universites` application, tightening requirements to universities and their branches that resulted in a significant decrease in quantity of them. The research studies the structure of market for higher education services in Russia based on the data of universities in Moscow and Moscow region for 2019 year by assessing the demand function and testing it for structural changes. The purpose of the work is to conduct a regression analysis of demand for higher education services in Russia and to test the hypothesis of structural changes in the demand model being an evidence of the degree of differentiation.
Methodology. The idea of the model and the estimation procedure is borrowed from the article of Ber- ry (1994) so that we conduct the regression analysis for the dependent variable of the share of students in the particular university. The hypothesis of structural changes in the model of demand on higher education is tested by dividing the sample in two clusters by the values of the regressors; in two groups with the high and low positions in the university rank; in two groups by education program in Econom- ics and Management.
The results of the research allow to identify the peculiarities of university choice. Applicants of low rank universities more often make choice in favor of education program Management rather than Eco- nomics; additional free places to study significantly increase the quantity of potential students being a decisive factor of university application. Applicants of high rank universities account for the number of free places in a less extent results indicate a high differentiation level between universities. The number of Economics and Management students of high rank universities significantly depends on the military department. The results allow us to conclude about high level of differentiation and low level of substi- tution on the market for higher education services.
Metrics
References
Beblavy M., Teteryatnikova M., Thum A. Does the growth in higher education mean a decline in the quality of degrees? The role of economic incentives to increase college enrollment rates // CEPS Working document No. 405. 2015.
Berry S. T. Estimating discrete-choice models of product differentiation // The RAND Journal of Economics. 1994. P. 242–262. DOI: 10.2307/2555829
Berry S. T., Haile P. A. Identification in differentiated products markets using market level data // Econometrica. 2014. No. 82 (5). P. 1749–1797. DOI: 10.3982/ECTA9027
Berry S., Levinsohn J., Pakes A. Automobile prices in market equilibrium // Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society. 1995. P. 841–890. DOI: 10.2307/2171802
Bresnahan T. F. Competition and collusion in the American automobile industry: The 1955 price war // The Journal of Industrial Economics. 1987. P. 457–482. DOI: 10.2307/2098583
Bresnahan T. F. Duopoly models with consistent conjectures // The American Economic Review. 1981. No. 71 (5). P. 934–945.
Gandhi A., Houde J. F. Measuring substitution patterns in differentiated products industries // NBER Working Paper No. 26375. 2019.
Goldberg A. E. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure // University of Chicago Press. 1995.
Hay D. Sequential entry and entry-deterring strategies // Oxford Economic Papers. 1976. No 28. P. 240–257. 10. Massif ication, globalization and new technologies: higher education in the face of change. URL: http://w w w.sirisacademic.com/wb/blog/ massification-globalisation-and-new-technologies- higher-education-in-the-face-of-change/
Prescott E. C., Visscher M. Sequential location among firms with foresight // The Bell Journal of Economics. 1977. No. 8. P. 378–393. DOI: 10.2307/ 3003293
Reynaert M., Verboven F. Improving the performance of random coefficients demand models: the role of optimal instruments // Journal of Econometrics. 2013. No. 179 (1). P. 83–98.
Беляков С. А. Лекции по экономике образования. М. : ГУ – ВШЭ, 2002. 338 с.
Вашурина Е. В., Евдокимова Я. Ш., Овчинников М. Н. О некоторых подходах к разработке типологии российских вузов // Университетское управление: практика и анализ. 2014. No 4-5. C. 92–93.
Дмитриенко К. Ю. Моделирование оптимального поведения фирмы на рынке олигополии при условии неценовой дифференциации товара // Вестник НГУ. Серия: Социально-экономические науки. 2009. Т. 9, вып. 1. С. 42–53.
Дрантусова Н. В., Князев Е. А. Институциональный ландшафт высшего образования в России: ключевые векторы развития // Вестник международных организаций: образование, наука, новая экономика. 2013. Т. 8, No. 1.
Князев Е. А., Дрантусова Н. В. Дифференциация в высшем образовании: основные концепции и подходы к изучению // Университетское управление: практика и анализ. 2012. No 5. С. 43–52.
Ковалева Т. А., Сафонова М. А., Соколов М. М. Что определяет стоимость обучения в российских вузах? //Университетское управление: практика и анализ. – 2017. – Т. 21. – No. 1 (107).
Платонова Д. П. Горизонтальная и вертикальная дифференциация системы высшего образования в России // Университетское управление: практика и анализ. 2015. No 4 (98).
Полищук Л., Ливни Э. Качество высшего образования в России: роль конкуренции и рынка труда // Вопросы образования. 2005. No 1. С. 70–86.
Copyright (c) 2020 Telezhkina M.S., Ganshina A.V.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
