1. 1 Mobility and Meritocracy A B Atkinson, Nuffield College, Oxford LABOR June 2007

2. 2 1.Meritocracy as a political objective 2.Mobility seen as key to meritocracy 3.Concern (in UK) that becoming less mobile and meritocratic Why? How? True?

3. 3 Amartya Sen: “The idea of meritocracy may have many virtues, but clarity is not one of them”. Instrumental : “the incentive view of merit is underdefined, since it is dependent on the preferred view of a good society” Intrinsic : “quality of such actions, judged in a result-independent way”.

4. 4 How relate to standard welfare economics? Trade-off between equity and efficiency embodied in Social Welfare Function based on individual welfares. Mirrlees model: Assume wage rate = marginal product = ability Net earnings E = Aℓ – T(Aℓ) where A denotes ability and ℓ = effort/hours (leave effort on one side ℓ = 1). SWF W ≡ ∑ i V(A i -T i ) Where does meritocracy come in?

5. 5 Roland Bénabou: Two-dimensional measure of meritocracy: Assignment based on talent rather than background Extent to which reward is based on talent Taken for granted in Mirrlees model

6. 6 Assignment Model (Mayer, RE Stat 1960) Self-employed produce A Entrepreneur employs (λ-1) people, generating profit λA-w-c Workers receive wage depending on match w = w 0 +(1-θ)λA Workers decide on basis of E{w}

7. 7 If all A ≥ A* are entrepreneurs, and distribution has a Pareto tail, then E{A} = hA* (h > 1) determines A o such that all with A ≤ A o are workers. Ability Workers E{w} Entrepreneurs Self- employed Reward Assignment A*AoAo

8. 8 E t = α A t + βE t-1 + ε t What to do with mobility?

9. 9 Mobility between and within generations A F E F e F A S E S e S r(E S, E F ) or r(e S, e F ) or r(E s, e F ) ? Depends on mechanisms

10. 10 Relation with economic model (demand side) Assignment model without self employment and λ=2 (set median A = 1) With random assignment, output = 2; With perfect meritocracy, output = 2h > 2.; With β inheriting position, output = 2h - 2β[h(1-γ)-1] where γ is the degree of heritability of ability

11. 11 NCDS (born 1958): total income of parents in 1974 and earnings of sons in 1991 BCS (born 1970): total income of parents in 1986 and earnings of sons in 2000 “We see sharp falls in cross- generational mobility of economic status between the cohorts” (Blanden, Goodman, Gregg and Machin). Inter-generational mobility in the UK

12. 12 York 1950-1975-8 and NCDS 1974 and 1991/9 special sample (York) small sample size (287) not a cohort Compare elasticity for men (age adjusted earnings) York (Atkinson et al) 0.418 (0.097) NCDS (Jäntti et al) 0.359 (0.03)

13. 13

14. 14

15. 15

16. 16 Conclusions Need to clarify meaning of meritocracy Need model of labour market that separates different elements Relation to mobility is complex Intergenerational mobility in UK either ∩ or