Talk:Human capital

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Business (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

This article clearly needs work. The explanation of Human Capital is sadly lacking in the Introduction and I saw no subsequent section expanding on the introductory statement. Instead, there is a brief statement followed by a mishmash of criticisms and contrary ideas.
Is this an Encyclopedia article or someone's effort to trash ideas and obfuscate the matter?
I studied Economics in the '60s. The concept of Human Capital was important to me during my entire career analyzing real estate and vast quantities of vacant land in Alaska (which is often considered a Third World Country for many valid reasons). The indigenous residents, Alaska Natives, were overrun by Russians (in the southern part of this vast land), then the American colonists came in the 19th and 20th centuries. The concept of Human Capital made a huge difference in the economic development of an area with a human population less than one person per square mile. (5,280'x2)
The Pulitzer Prize-winning book "Guns Germs and Steel" by Diamond demonstrates Human Capital in a very interesting light.
I'd like to see a good Wikipedia article, not the sadly lacking text I see. On a good day, I can do a bit of research and write well, but age and illness combine to limit my time devoted to this task. I am willing to help someone skilled at writing articles in Wikipedia format. My area of expertise lies in the field of land economics.
//Don K. (talk) 08:54, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
This article addresses human capital exclusively from the standpoint of economics. Human capital (and human capital management) is also a major concept in organizational management, distinct from human resources and human resources management. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.206.114.147 (talk) 13:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Removal of standard HR source[edit]

The following source has been removed from the list of external links without explanation: [1], also here. The document is Voinovich's 2002 "Report to the President: The Crisis in Human Capital". The original government website document, that directly opens the PDF document is http://www.google[DOT]com.vn/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hsgac.senate.gov%2Fdownload%2Freport-to-the-president-on-the-crisis-in-human-capital-sen-voinovich&ei=mLi2UqeNNOiwiQeSoIHYCg&usg=AFQjCNGOA0v0Hg8tY1655cPM_qp9WEr3SA&sig2=-k1hbf687K5Tpono-cRQjw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.aGc . (The [DOT] has been inserted since WP will not allow a google search page to be saved.) Thank you. I will not be watchlisting this page. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 14:28, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The document is fairly typical political bluster. Whatever helpful information in it is obscured by the posturing and poor organization. If the document is worth linking, let's find a source that demonstrates that it is indeed important and provides a concise and clear summary of what is in the document. Some historical context would be helpful too. --Ronz (talk) 16:15, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't see a Wikiproject for public administration, but there is one for United States Public Policy. Perhaps they would be able to help you. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 17:17, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Marxist analysis[edit]

As interesting as this section is, it still amounts to original research. While Marx may have made such claims, one still can't cite him. And the point about human capital being similar to the concept of labour-power is not really drawn out. According to the labour theory of value, the value of a commodity (say, even labour-power if you agree it is just like any other reproducable commodity which Sraffians don't for example) is determined more or less by the amount of socially necessary labour-time required for its production (this obviously doesn't apply to a small number of commodities like rare wine or coins). Then human capital in the form of education is the socially necessary labour-time being accumulated by and invested in the commodity labour-power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 21:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Cognitive Ability/ Capacity[edit]

Shouldn't "cognitive ability" be changed to "cognitive capacity" since ability is more often used as a learned skill? Capacity, on the other hand, designates an inborn ability or potential to develop into an ability. Especially in the "Competence and capital" section, where it mentions "intelligence". Dwellee (talk) 15:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Structure of this article[edit]

This article deals with three aspects of Human capital:

1. At a philosophical level about its role versus financial capital - here is where the Karl marx citations come in.

2. at a national level - how countries can improve their standing in the world

3. at a business level - how companies can manage and grow their intangibles.

Can such an article be split? (I am competent to deal with the 3rd aspect, but certainly want to stay awy from political controversies)

GioCM (talk) 18:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Is the phrase "Human-Capital" just political rally cry? Comment[edit]

I have to speculate the phrase was introduced as a response to economic theories that didn't represent workers' as having value, only as a cost, within economic activities. Spence's Signaling seems to cover the choice to establish relationships, networks, & ongoing dynamics. It doesn't appear to provide ongoing measurements of values.

This article seems lost as to how to define and thus measure Human-Capital. It bumps around the history of the Human-Capital. The Wikipedia B classification seems to reflect this. It senses the wandering through the subject in the sum of it. What that is really seeing is that "Human Capital" as a definition, has not been defined.

One idea for modeling contributions of intangibles to economic activity is to model emergence from the dynamics of change. Economic boom-bust cycles or value bubble histories appear rooted in intangibles. These combined macro-micro events aren't yet handled. Billions of signals pass through networks. Reactions and results are emergent productions of those events.

Athletes' changing value throughout a career is an example. Signaling through achievements and responses indicate value. How to measure and over what time will the value exist?

The ideas of complexity theory, complex adaptive systems(John Holland), should provide a modeling framework. A general outline for this modification to economics is in the book "The Origin of Wealth" by Eric D. Beinhocker(see summary table page 97). These incomplete but evolving ideas may handle modeling of dynamic economic events and associated values.

(- Cheers, John S Wolter (talk) 15:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnswolter (talkcontribs)

Dr. Hanushek's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Hanushek has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:


This article is completely incoherent. It is the worst entry I have ever read in Wikipedia. It is a sequence of random thoughts, reflecting individual ideas and generally lacking any references. It has sections that cannot be understood; sections that are very poorly written; and combinations of disjoint thoughts.

There is no way to salvage this topic from what is currently there. It is an important topic that needs attention.


We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Hanushek has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:


  • Reference : Hanushek, Eric A. & Woessmann, Ludger, 2010. "The Economics of International Differences in Educational Achievement," IZA Discussion Papers 4925, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Angrist's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Angrist has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:


this article seems to miss the underlying economics

To economists, human capital is an investment in human productive capacity that has costs and generates a return. The theoretical notion of human capital aligns closely with the theory of investment in any sort of capital, where current income is foregone in the hopes of getting more back later. This has a precise theoretical meaning, its not a term we think of as vernacular or jargon. Much of the entry is besides the point - esp everything starting with "marxist analysis". The article doesn't appear to have been written by an economist.


We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Angrist has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:


  • Reference : Abdulkadiroglu, Atila & Angrist, Joshua & Pathak, Parag A., 2012. "The Elite Illusion: Achievement Effects at Boston and New York Exam Schools," IZA Discussion Papers 6790, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 03:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Terjesen's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Terjesen has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:


Jacob Mincer's academic affiliation (Columbia University) should be mentioned at the outset, but many academics would probably place emphasis on Becker, and mention Mincer only later note Mincer's contributions together with others.

I would get rid of "It is an aggregate" and instead use "Human capital is an aggregate..." There is a giant literature on human capital and gender which is completely missed here, and could at least be referenced with a subsequent page. For example, this gets into literature on human capital and career trajectories, and differences for men and women in terms of human capital stocks and developments over time. There is also a giant literature on human capital and entrepreneurial propensity which could easily merit its own Wikipedia page. I do edit Wikipedia pages from time to time, but only in areas where I would consider myself one of the top 50 subject matter experts. I know human capital but I am more familiar with sub-topics of human capital like those mentioned above.


We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Terjesen has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:


  • Reference : Siri Terjesen, 2007. "Building a Better Rat Trap: Technological Innovation, Human Capital and the Irula," Jena Economic Research Papers 2007-031, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 11:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Gomes's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Gomes has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:


The article would benefit from a few refinements:

1) First paragraph: Human capital, in economics, is in fact a term popularized by the mentioned authors, but a few references to their most significant work in the field should be incorporated: e.g., Becker, G.S. (1962). “Investment in Human Capital: a Theoretical Analysis.” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 70, pp. 9-49; Mincer, J. (1958). “Investment in Human Capital and Personal Income Distribution.” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 66, pp. 281-302. 2) First paragraph: it is said that Gary Becker is an economist from Chicago, but no reference to the affiliation of Jacob Mincer is mentioned. 3) Fourth paragraph: it is not clear how the signaling theory of Spence functions as a critique to the concept of human capital. A clarification is required. 4) The fifth and sixth paragraph, which discuss the relation between the importance of the economic sectors and human capital are poorly written and confusing. They need to be rewritten in a more intelligible form. 5) In the ninth paragraph, in the sentence ‘However it is broken down or defined, human capital is vitally important for an organization’s success …’ I believe that the word ‘However’ should be replaced by the term ‘Independently of how …’. 6) In the section Competence and Capital, not only references are missing, but the text is confuse: what does the following sentence mean?: ‘The introduction is explained and justified by the unique characteristics of competence …’ 7) In the cumulative growth section, I’m not sure whether the reference to India is relevant from the point of view of what an encyclopedia entry relating the concept of human capital must contain.


We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Gomes has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:


  • Reference : Tiago Neves Sequeira & Alexandra Ferreira Lopes & Orlando Gomes, 2012. "A Growth Model with Qualities, Varieties, and Human Capital: Stability and Transitional Dynamics," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2012_04, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 12:42, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Breton's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Breton has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:


This article is poorly organized and conceptually confusing, possibly the worst Wikipedia article I have ever seen. I think most of it should be eliminated, but I hesitate to make this decision myself. In particular, the attempt to connect Marx to human capital is not appropriate. I could try to rewrite the article, but it would be much shorter.


We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Breton has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:


  • Reference : Theodore R. Breton, 2014. "Schooling and Economic Growth: What Have We Learned?," DOCUMENTOS DE TRABAJO CIEF 010923, UNIVERSIDAD EAFIT.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2016 (UTC)