The Roy-Borjas model predicts that international migrants are less educated than nonmigrants because the returns to education are generally higher in developing (migrant-sending) than in developed (migrant-receiving) countries. However, empirical evidence often shows the opposite. Using the case of Mexico-U.S. migration, we show that this inconsistency between predictions and empirical evidence can be resolved when the human capital of migrants is assessed using a two-dimensional measure of occupational skills rather than by educational attainment. Thus, focusing on a single skill dimension when investigating migrant selection can lead to misleading conclusions about the underlying economic incentives and behavioral models of migration.

Choosing a university and field of study is a key life decision that influences one’s lifelong earnings trajectory. Data shows that the share of individuals going to university is unequally distributed, and is lower among disadvantaged students. High-achieving students who are low income are less likely to opt for ambitious education paths, despite the high returns of education. Even among those students who decide to apply for college, the likelihood of whether they will apply to prestigious colleges or renowned study programs differs along the distribution of socioeconomic background. It does not only matter if you study, but also what and where you study, as there is a large variation in long-run outcomes, such as earnings, both between universities as well as between fields of study. Part of this mismatch can be attributed to unequal starting points for children, in terms of both institutional settings and the quality of information available within their close networks.

Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund besuchen im Vergleich zu Kindern ohne Migrationshintergrund deutlich seltener Kindertagesstätten (Kitas), obwohl gerade sie von einem Kitabesuch besonders profitieren würden. Ist sich die Bevölkerung dieser Diskrepanz bewusst? Und wie steht sie zu verschiedenen politischen Maßnahmen, die dieses Problem angehen? Wir untersuchen, ob Informationen über Ungleichheiten und Diskriminierung in der frühkindlichen Betreuung die Zustimmung der Bevölkerung zu gleichheitsfördernden Politikmaßnahmen beeinflussen. Dafür befragen wir 4 800 repräsentativ ausgewählte Personen aus der deutschen Bevölkerung. Es zeigt sich, dass die Befragten oft erhebliche Fehleinschätzungen über das Ausmaß der Ungleichheiten und Diskriminierung beim Kitazugang zwischen Familien mit und ohne Migrationshintergrund haben. Zufällig bereitgestellte Informationen über das tatsächliche Ausmaß dieser Diskrepanzen verringern die politische Polarisierung, d.h. Unterschiede in der Zustimmung zu Unterstützungsmaßnahmen für Familien mit Migrationshintergrund. Unsere Ergebnisse legen nahe, dass verzerrte Wahrnehmungen sozialer Ungleichheiten zu Meinungsunterschieden in der Bevölkerung beitragen. Ein besserer Informationsstand in der Bevölkerung könnte diese Polarisierung in der Zustimmung zu gleichheitsfördernden Politikmaßnahmen beim Zugang zu Kitas verringern.

Why are children with lower socioeconomic status (SES) substantially less likely to be enrolled in child care? We study whether barriers in the application process work against lower-SES children — the group known to benefit strongest from child care enrollment. In an RCT in Germany with highly subsidized child care (N = 607), we offer treated families information and personal assistance for applications. We find substantial, equity-enhancing effects of the treatment, closing half of the large SES gap in child care enrollment. Increased enrollment for lower-SES families is likely driven by altered application knowledge and behavior. We discuss scalability of our intervention and derive policy implications for the design of universal child care programs.