\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter \IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}% {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}% {\RequirePackage{color}} \usepackage{colortbl} \usepackage{wrapfig} \usepackage{ifxetex} \ifxetex \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{xunicode} \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash} \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{} \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}} \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}} \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}} \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}} \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono} \else \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}% {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc} \PrerenderUnicode{–} }% {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}} \usepackage[english]{babel} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{float} \usepackage[]{ucs} \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash } \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{} \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}} \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}} \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,} \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ } \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>} \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}} \def\textJapanese{} \def\textChinese{} \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{} \fi \def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small} \DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25} \usepackage{relsize} \RequirePackage{array} \def\@testpach{\@chclass \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@ \else \z@ \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}% \@chnum \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else \z@ \@chclass \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else \if \@nextchar !6 \else \if \@nextchar @7 \else \if \@nextchar (8 \else \if \@nextchar )9 \else 10 \@chnum \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else \if \@nextchar p4 \else \if \@nextchar b5 \else \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi} \gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr} \def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}} \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \def\abbr{} \def\corr{} \def\expan{} \def\gap{} \def\orig{} \def\reg{} \def\ref{} \def\sic{} \def\persName{}\def\name{} \def\placeName{} \def\orgName{} \def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}} \def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}} \def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}} \def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}} \def\textquoted#1{‘#1’} \def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}} \def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}} \def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}} \def\titlem{\itshape} \newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{bibl}{}{} \newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{rubric}{}{} \newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par } \newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}} \newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}} \definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75} \def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}} \DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@} \def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}} \begingroup \catcode`\_=\active \gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}} \endgroup \mathcode`\_=\string"8000 \catcode`\_=12\relax \usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry} \usepackage{framed} \definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95} \usepackage{longtable} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \usepackage{fancyvrb} \usepackage{fancyhdr} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{marginnote} \renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1} \renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize} \def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif} \pagestyle{fancy} \usepackage[pdftitle={Investigating the Causal Relationship between Education and Economic Growth in Zimbabwe}, pdfauthor={}]{hyperref} \hyperbaseurl{} \paperwidth210mm \paperheight297mm \def\@pnumwidth{1.55em} \def\@tocrmarg {2.55em} \def\@dotsep{4.5} \setcounter{tocdepth}{3} \clubpenalty=8000 \emergencystretch 3em \hbadness=4000 \hyphenpenalty=400 \pretolerance=750 \tolerance=2000 \vbadness=4000 \widowpenalty=10000 \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}% {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}} \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}% {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large}} \renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}% {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\large}} \renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}% {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\normalsize}} \renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}% {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}% {-1em}% {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}} \def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt} \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par \endgroup} \def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}} \def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}} \def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}} \def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}} \@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{} \@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{} \newif\if@mainmatter \@mainmattertrue \def\chaptername{Chapter} \def\frontmatter{% \pagenumbering{roman} \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section} \def\theHsection{\roman{section}} \def\@chapapp{}% } \def\mainmatter{% \cleardoublepage \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter} \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \pagenumbering{arabic} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6} \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}% \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section} \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}} } \def\backmatter{% \cleardoublepage \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2} \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}% \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}} \appendix } \newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{% \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}% {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}% \leftmargin\labelwidth \advance\leftmargin\labelsep \@openbib@code \usecounter{enumiv}% \let\p@enumiv\@empty \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}% }% \sloppy \clubpenalty4000 \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty \widowpenalty4000% \sfcode`\.\@m}% {\def\@noitemerr {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}% \endlist} \def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}} \parskip0pt \parindent1em \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \newenvironment{reflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{sansreflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{specHead}[2]% {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}% \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}% \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}% \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}% }{} \def\TheFullDate{2012-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2012)} \def\TheID{\makeatother } \def\TheDate{2012-01-15} \title{Investigating the Causal Relationship between Education and Economic Growth in Zimbabwe} \author{}\makeatletter \makeatletter \newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{% \clearpage \if@twoside \ifodd\c@page \hbox{}\newpage \if@twocolumn \hbox{}\newpage \fi \fi \fi } \makeatother \makeatletter \thispagestyle{empty} \markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author} \renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@ \belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip \abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@ \belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@ \def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@ \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@ \itemsep 1pt} } \makeatother \fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm} \fancyhf{} \setlength{\headheight}{14pt} \fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} \fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} \fancyfoot[RO]{} \fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID} \fancyfoot[LE]{} \fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID} \hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true} \fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}} \date{} \usepackage{authblk} \providecommand{\keywords}[1] { \footnotesize \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1 } \usepackage{graphicx,xcolor} \definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81} \definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9} \definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70} \definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} \renewenvironment{abstract}{% \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space} }{% \vskip8pt \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt } \usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos} \makeatother \usepackage{lineno} \linenumbers \begin{document} \author[1]{Dr. Tichaona Zivengwa} \affil[1]{ University of Zimbabwe} \renewcommand\Authands{ and } \date{\small \em Received: 7 December 2011 Accepted: 2 January 2012 Published: 15 January 2012} \maketitle \begin{abstract} This paper specifically investigates the causality between education and economic growth in Zimbabwe during the period 1980 to 2008. The empirical investigation has been carried out by Pairwise Granger Causality and Vector Autoregression(VAR) modelling using modern econometrics techniques of unit root test since macroeconomic time series data was used which is frequently non stationary. The findings confirmed that there is uni-directional causality between education and economic growth in the Zimbabwean economy running from education to economic growth as established by granger causality tests, variance decomposition and impulse response functions. This shows that investing in education is important for economic growth. The results also confirm a transmission mechanism that runs from education to economic growth via physical capital investment. This shows that a rise in human capital boosts the return on physical investment. The study recommends that the government and the private sector should concentrate on policies that will improve the education system. \end{abstract} \keywords{Education, Economic Growth, Causality, FStatistic Testing, VAR and Zimbabwe.} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark} \end{textblock*} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}} \end{textblock*} \let\tabcellsep& \section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par ducation can be viewed as both a consumer good and a capital good because it offers utility to a consumer and also serves as an input into the production of other goods and services. As a capital good, education can be used to develop the human resources necessary for economic and social transformation and thus leads to economic growth. The focus on education as a capital good relates to the concept of human capital, which emphasises that the development of skills is an important factor in production activities. Education is seen as contributing to economic growth in two ways. Firstly, education directly affects economic growth through making individual workers more productive. Secondly, education indirectly affects economic growth by leading to the creation of knowledge, ideas and technological innovation -either through the process of acquiring education itself or because education is a key input into the development of a research sector that produces new knowledge and ideas. Growth and human capital development can be mutually reinforcing. Growth promotes human capital development, and human development promotes growth \hyperref[b21]{(Jaoul, 2004)}. The Author : Department of Economics, University of Zimbabwe, P.O. Box MP167 Mount Pleasant, Harare. E-mail : tzivengwa@sociol.uz.ac.zw following figure shows the relationship between education, physical capital investment and economic growth; The virtuous cycle in figure \hyperref[fig_0]{1} shows that education and economic growth reinforce each other and therefore depends upon each other. As the economy grows, it indicates that productive capacity has increased which comes with it an increase in employment. This increase in employment will result in higher incomes and thus a greater expenditure on education with more people getting access to education. As more people get education, their productive capacity increases and thus contribute to economic growth. This virtuous cycle will continue to repeat itself until the economy develops and as a result contributes to a significant reduction in poverty. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to investigate the causal relationship between economic growth and education with a link to physical capital so as to make informed policies related to education and economic growth.\par The rest of the paper is structured as follows; section 2 gives the background to education and economic growth in Zimbabwe, section 3 reviews the literature on the relationship between education and economic growth, section 4 outlines the methodology used in the study, section 5 gives the results and their discussion while section 6 concludes by giving conclusions and policy recommendations. \section[{II.}]{II.}\par Background To Education And Economic Growth In Zimbabwe a) Trend in Tertiary education enrolments in Zimbabwe 1 The enrolment in tertiary education showed an upward trend from 1980 to 1987. This shows an increase in gross enrolment of 364\%. During this first period after independence, more tertiary institutions were constructed by the government which includes teacher training colleges, agricultural colleges, technical colleges and universities. After this the enrolment stabilised at around 35 000 per year from 1988 to 1993. Tertiary education enrolment enrolment picked up in 1994 and steadily increased by 37\% to reach a peak in the year 1997. This was followed by a stable enrolment of around 48 000 between 1998 and 2002. This was a period affected by the drought in the history of Zimbabwe. Political tension also occurred during the same period as the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), one of the main political parties in Zimbabwe came into being. Enrolment then increased sharply between 2002 and 2005 giving an increase by 84\% before sharply dropping by 51.4\% between 2005 and 2008. This was a period of economic and political crisis in Zimbabwe and this impacted negatively on gross tertiary enrolments. Figure \hyperref[fig_2]{3} Real GDP per capita shows an upward trend between 1980 and 1982. After this, real GDP per capita dropped during the period 1983 to 1984 as a result mainly of drought. The contribution of agriculture to GDP dropped from 17.8\% in 1981 to 11.2\% in 1984. Real GDP per capita followed an upward trend from 1985 to 1991 before declining in 1992 (CSO statistical Year Book, 2003). The sharp decline was also a result of the drought that hit the economy in 1992. The agriculture's contribution to GDP dropped to 7.4\% in 1992. The GDP per capita followed a steady pattern between 1993 and 1996 before increasing from 1997 to a reach a peak in 1 The trend in Real GDP per Capita was established by the author using the Central Statistical Office data and data from the Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education for the period 1980 to 2008. 2 The trend in Real GDP per Capita was established by the author using the Central Statistical Office data from its Statistical Year Books for the period between 1980 and 2008.\par 1998. The economy dropped between 1999 and 2008.This could be explained by the controversial land reform that started in 2000, the drought that hit the economy in 2002 and the political and economic crises that occurred during the period. Figure \hyperref[fig_2]{3} \section[{Thousands}]{Thousands} \section[{Tertiary Education enrolments}]{Tertiary Education enrolments} \section[{Tertiary Education}]{Tertiary Education}\par The trends in both tertiary education enrolment and real GDP per capita in Zimbabwe displayed a common trend implying that either education contributed towards economic growth or economic growth contributed towards education. It is also possible that the two could be mutually reinforcing each other. The two could not be represented on one framework because of significant differences in their scales. \section[{III.}]{III.}\par Literature Review a) Theoretical relationship on education and economic growth Following \hyperref[b25]{Lucas (1988)} and \hyperref[b24]{Loening (2002)}, human capital is considered an independent factor of production and this is enshrined in endogenous growth models. This is presented by the Cobb-Douglas production function with constant returns to scale as follows:\par (\par . \section[{t Y AK H L}]{t Y AK H L}\par where Y is defined as output: A is the total factor productivity or the technical change; K is physical capital, H is human capital and L is labour. This model can also be expressed as a per capita growth model. The growth of the economy depends on the physical capital investment and human capital stock (education) that it has. Traditionally, investment is widely believed to be an important determinant of economic growth but recent research hinges on the importance of education. Human capital represents the investment people make in themselves that augment their economic productivity. The theoretical framework that looks at the adoption of education as a form of investment has become known as human capital theory. Based upon the work of \hyperref[b37]{Schultz (1971)}, \hyperref[b35]{Sakamota and Powers (1995)}, \hyperref[b32]{Psacharopoulos and Woodhall (1997)}, human capital theory rests on the assumption that formal education is highly instrumental and even necessary to improve the production capacity of a population, that is an educated population is a productive population. \hyperref[b29]{Nelson and Phelps (1966)} and {\ref Benhabib and Spiegal (1994)} argued that a more educated labour force would innovate faster. \hyperref[b25]{Lucas (1988)} and \hyperref[b26]{Mankiw, Romer, and Weil (1992)} observed that the accumulation of human capital could increase the productivity of other factors and thereby raise growth of the economy. In the Lucas and Mankiw, Romer, and Weil models, a state's rate of growth depends on the rate of accumulation of human capital. \section[{b) Empirical literature review}]{b) Empirical literature review}\par The early work on education and growth includes the work of \hyperref[b25]{Lucas (1988)} which revealed that the growth rate of human capital, which is also 3 Sweden (1910-1986), United {\ref Kingdom (1919} {\ref Kingdom ( -1987))}, Japan , France (1899-1986), Italy (1885-1986), and Australia . dependent on the amount of time allocated by individuals to acquire skills, is critical for growth. The model was further extended by \hyperref[b33]{Rebelo (1991)} by introducing physical capital as an additional input in the human capital accumulation function. The model of endogenous growth by \hyperref[b34]{Romer (1990)} assumes that the creation of new ideas is a direct function of human capital, which manifests itself in the form of knowledge. As a result, investment in human capital leads to growth in physical capital which in turn leads to economic growth. Studies that supported the human capital accumulation as a source of economic growth also include . Some studies have examined different ways through which human capital can affect economic growth. Gupta and {\ref Chakraborty (2004)} develop an endogenous growth model of a dual economy where human capital accumulation is the source of economic growth. They argued that the duality between the rich individual exists in the mechanism of human capital accumulation. \hyperref[b8]{Bils and Klenow (2000)} raise the issue of causality, suggesting that reverse causation running from higher economic growth to additional education may be at least as important as the causal effect of education on growth in the cross-country association.\par De Meulemeester and Rochat (1995) tested for Granger causality between higher education enrolments and economic growth in six countries (Sweden, United Kingdom, Japan, France, Italy and Australia) 3 for different periods for each country ranging from 1885 to 1987. They found uni-directional short run causality running from higher education enrolments to economic growth in Sweden, the United Kingdom, Japan, and France and bi-directional causality between higher education enrolments and economic growth in Australia and Italy.\par Using US annual data for the period 1949 to 1984, In and Doucouliagos (1997) found bi-directional causality between economic growth and human capital formation. Asteriou and Agiomirgianakis (2001) also found bi-directional causality between the same variables for Greece using annual data from 1960 to 1994.\par During the period before the Second World War, \hyperref[b21]{Jaoul (2004)} analysed causality between higher education and economic growth in France and Germany and obtained results which confirms that higher education has an influence on gross domestic product for France while no relationship was found for Germany. Bo-nai and Xiong-Xiang (2006), using Chinese annual data from 1952 to 2003, showed that there is an evidence of a bi-directional causality between education investments and economic growth. \hyperref[b23]{Kui (2006)}, using annual data for China from 1978 to 2004 established that economic growth was the cause of higher education. \hyperref[b19]{Hunang, Jin, and Sun (2009)} analysed the causality between scale evolution of higher education and economic growth in China, for the period 1972 and 2007. The results confirm that there is a long-run steady relationship between higher education and GDP per capita. \hyperref[b31]{Pradham (2009)} employed the error correction modeling technique to show that there is uni-directional causality that runs from higher education to economic growth for India using annual data from 1951 to 2002.\par The Johansen co-integration and Tod and Yamamoto causality approaches were used in VAR framework by \hyperref[b13]{Chaudhary, Iqbal and Gillani (2009)} to analyse the relationship between higher education and economic growth for Pakistan for the period 1972 to 2005. The obtained results demonstrated that there was unidirectional causality running from economic growth to higher education.\par For Northern Cyprus, Katircioglu (2009) demonstrated that long-run equilibrium relationship exists between higher education growth and economic growth. The results suggested uni-directional causality that runs from higher education to economic growth.\par Most studies done were from the developed world and no study of this nature has been done for the case of Zimbabwe. The studies done have continued to provide mixed results with some showing uni-directional causality while others show bi-directional causality. Therefore, this paper contributes to the existing literature by employing granger causality testing to test the causal relationship between human capital stock and real income using annual data for Zimbabwe (a developing country) from 1980 to 2008. An understanding of the nature of the relationship will aid in policy making and implementation. \section[{IV. Methodology And Data Descriptions}]{IV. Methodology And Data Descriptions}\par Clearly, the education-growth relationship is not so simple that one can compute average years of education and confidently predict growth. I believe my model clarifies matters. The methodology employed in this study is a quantitative one that involves first performing unit root tests before running the main model of Granger Causality Tests and VAR. \section[{a) Unit Root Tests}]{a) Unit Root Tests}\par The variables to be used in this study are time series variables which are usually non-stationary. These variables should be tested for stationarity before they are used in the model. If the variables are stationary in levels, that is, without differencing, they are said to be integrated of order 0. If they become stationary after first differencing they are said to be non stationary in levels and require to be differenced once to become stationary and thus are integrated of order 1. Differencing a variable twice to achieve stationarity means the variable is integrated of order 2. \section[{b) Granger Causality Tests}]{b) Granger Causality Tests}\par The Granger Causality test as proposed by Granger (1969) and \hyperref[b40]{Sims (1972)} is used to test whether one variable is useful in forecasting another variable and vice-versa. In general, a time series X is said to Granger cause another time series Y if it can be shown that the series X values provide statistically significant information about the future values of series Y, if not, X does not Granger cause Y. This is confirmed by a probability value that falls within the range of 1\% and 10\% or an F-statistic that takes an absolute value of at least 2. The larger the value, the more significant it becomes. The F-Statistic is constructed as follows;\par i. The F statistic Testing\par We use the F-statistics to test the validity of causality. It depends upon the restricted residual sum squares ( 1 RSS ) and unrestricted residual sum squares ( 2 RSS ). F is calculated as follows;1 2 2 ( )/ ( )/( ) RSS RSS m F RSS n k and F follows a normal distribution, ) , ( k n m .\par Where, m is the number of lags; k is the number of parameters involved in the model; and n is the sample size. The test is to reject the null hypothesis of non-causality between education and economic growth against an alternative hypothesis of causality between the two. If the realisation of the above statistic is significant, then we reject the non-causality hypothesis and conclude that education causes economic growth and vice versa. If it is not significant, then the noncausality hypothesis is accepted and concludes that education does not cause economic growth and vice versa.\par Causality can either be uni-directional or bidirectional. The null hypothesis of no causality is tested against the alternative hypothesis of causality between two variables. In a two variable model X and Y, the following two equations are estimated;1 1 1 1 1 m m t i t i t t i i Y X Y u (1) 1 1 2 1 1 m m t i t i t t i i X Y X u (2)\par Where 1i\par u and 2i u are serially uncorrelated random disturbances with zero mean. If X Granger causes Y; The study also uses a VAR framework to establish the direction of causality between education and economic growth. This should be done after testing the variables of the model for unit root tests using ADF test. The VAR methodology, although it does not have a sound theoretical framework, it can be used to test interdependent relationships among variables. In a VAR framework all variables are treated as endogenous variables and is a substitute methodology to simultaneous equations. The methodology will also employ innovation accounting and impulse response functions which are superior approaches to the traditional granger causality tests.0 1\textbf{2}\par i. The VAR Model Specification1 n t i ti t i X X\par where ( , , )t t t t X PCRGDP INVESTMENT EDUCATION\par which is a 3x3 vector of variables and 1 n are 3x3 matrices of coefficients while t is a vector of error terms.\par If all the variables of the model are integrated of the same order, that is, I (1), then a VECM can be constructed in which all variables enters the above model in their first differences.\par ii. Cointegration within VAR Cointegration refers to the situation where two or more non stationary series of the same order are found to have a long run relationship. Suppose a series t Y and t X are individually non-stationary and integrated of order one, I (1), we say they are integrated if their linear combination is integrated of order zero, I (0). If the variables are integrated of the same order, cointegration tests will be performed. If the variables are integrated of different orders, then the unrestricted VAR framework will be employed.\par iii. Variance Decomposition Variance decomposition permits inferences to be drawn regarding the proportion of the movement in a particular time-series due to its own earlier "shocks" visà-vis "shocks" arising from other variables in the VAR. After estimating the VAR, the impact of a "shock" in a particular variable is traced through the system of equations to determine the effect on all of the variables, including future values of the "shocked" variable. The technique breaks down the variance of the forecast errors for each variable following a "shock" to a particular variable and in this way it is possible to identify which variables are strongly affected and those that are not. \section[{iv. Impulse Response Functions}]{iv. Impulse Response Functions}\par The impulse response function analysis traces the time path of the effects of "shocks" of other variables contained in the VAR on a particular variable. In other words, this approach is designed to determine how each variable responds over time to an earlier "shock" in that variable and to "shocks" in other variables. If the impulse response function shows a stronger and longer reaction of economic growth to a "shock" in education than "shocks" in other variables, we would find support for the hypothesis that education causes economic growth. Similarly, if the impulse response function shows a stronger and longer reaction of education to a "shock" in economic growth than "shocks" in other variables, we would find support for the hypothesis that economic growth "causes" education.\par In this study causality on the following three variables will be tested, that is on, Economic Growth, Education and Investment. The variables are transformed to logarithms so as to improve on their statistical properties. However, the variable for economic growth was not expressed in logarithms since some values of this series are negative and thus there is no logarithm of a negative number. Therefore, the overall model is a semi-log model. \section[{d) Variables of the model}]{d) Variables of the model}\par In this model three variables will be used that is Economic growth, Education investment and aggregate investment. This is so because of their interrelatedness in growth in endogenous growth models. The number of variables has been limited to only 3 to ensure a sufficient number of observations. This is because of a small sample size used. \section[{i. Economic growth measured by per capita Real GDP (PCRGDP)}]{i. Economic growth measured by per capita Real GDP (PCRGDP)}\par Economic growth is defined as the increase in a nation's ability to produce goods and services over time as is shown by increased production levels in the economy. A growth in this per capita RGDP indicates an improvement in standards of living for citizens and hence leads to poverty reduction. This is the commonly used measure of economic growth as also used by \hyperref[b34]{Romer (1990)}, \hyperref[b33]{Rebelo (1991)}, Gupta and Chakraborty (2004) and {\ref Huang etal (2009)}. Economic growth is expected to relate positively and significantly with education and physical capital investment. \section[{ii. Human capital (Education)}]{ii. Human capital (Education)}\par The VAR model to be used in our analysis is as follows;\par This refers to investment in education. New technological developments are futile if skills are in short \section[{2012}]{2012}\par M ay between new knowledge and human capital. It has been shown that education is an important empowering tool for gender equity and thus is assumed to significantly contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction (Ministry of Education, Sport, Arts and Culture, 2007). In this study education is proxied by time series variable of tertiary education enrolments \hyperref[b18]{(Huang et al, 2009)} which sums university enrolment, teacher training colleges enrolment, agricultural training colleges enrolment and technical colleges enrolment for the period under study. This variable was chosen as it contributes directly to skilled human capital. This is a quantity measure of education which closely relates to the quality of education in the country. Secondary school enrolment used in some studies (such as by \hyperref[b28]{Musibau, 2005)} suffers from the fact that not all students from secondary schools will constitute skilled human capital in the economy. In addition, secondary education only contributes to economic growth after a considerably long period as compared to tertiary education. Education expenditure is another variable that could be used as a proxy for education but it also fails to reflect the quality of education in the economy. The variable chosen is expected to positively and significantly relate with economic growth and physical capital investment.\par iii. Physical capital Investment (LINV) Physical capital (investment) refers to an increase in capital stock in the economy and is one of the traditional determinants of economic growth. Gross Fixed Capital Formation is used as a proxy for physical capital investment. This variable is used in this model as a control variable and also because investment has a bearing on both economic growth and human capital development. {\ref Chakraborty (1994)} and Msibau( 2005) also included physical capital (investment) as an important determinant in their growth models. This variable is expected to have a significant relationship with economic growth and education and vice versa. \section[{e) Data sources}]{e) Data sources}\par The annual data for the study is secondary data obtained from the Central Statistical Office and the Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education. Only these sources of data were used for consistency. The time series data for the study span from 1980 to 2008. The period is fairly long enough to get accurate relationship between education investment and economic growth in Zimbabwe.\par V. \section[{Estimation Of Results And Interpretation a) Stationarity tests}]{Estimation Of Results And Interpretation a) Stationarity tests}\par Unit root tests are performed on the following variables, Economic growth (PCRGDP), Human Capital as measured by Tertiary Education Enrolment (LTEDU) and Physical Capital Investment (LINV). The results show that PCRGDP is stationary in levels while the other two variables become stationary after second differencing. This shows that the variables cannot be cointegrated and only an unrestricted VAR model can be estimated. Therefore, the variables will be used to test for Pairwise Granger causality and VAR according to their levels of stationarity. PCRGDP will not be differenced while LTEDU and LINV will be differenced twice. Table \hyperref[tab_1]{1} summarises the unit root tests; \par ***Significant at 1\%, ** significant at 5\% and *significant at 10\%.\par Note : A constant and a trend option were used for levels and first differences while no trend and constant option was used for 2nd differencing.\par b) Pairwise Granger Causality Tests 4 \section[{M ay}]{M ay}\par The results in table \hyperref[tab_2]{2} indicate that there is a unidirectional causality between economic growth and education. This is so because the null hypothesis of education does not cause economic growth was rejected at the 5\% levels of significant. This clearly indicates that education causes economic growth. However, the reverse causality that economic growth causes education was found to be insignificant. This means that as education enrolment improves more skills are contributing to the growth of the economy, holding other factors constant. There is also a uni-directional causality running from investment to economic growth as the null hypothesis of no causality is rejected at the 10\% level of significance. This is supported by theory which states that investment is a major determinant of economic growth. Investment also has a significant impact on education as the null hypothesis of no causality is rejected at the 10\% level of significance. This shows that investment is an important variable in determining education in Zimbabwe. \section[{c) Estimation Results for VAR}]{c) Estimation Results for VAR}\par Before the VAR model is estimated, the optimal lag length was chosen using the Akaike Information Criteria (AIC). As \hyperref[b16]{Enders (1995)} suggested, the optima lag is selected based on the lowest values of AIC. A VAR with the least AIC 5 was selected and this was found to be 4. \section[{i. Variance Decomposition}]{i. Variance Decomposition}\par Therefore 4 lags were used in the VAR model. Tables \hyperref[tab_3]{3, 4} and 5 give the variance decompositions for the three variables included in the model. It can be noted that own series shocks explain most of the error variance even though the shock will also affect the other variables in the system.\par Appendix 1 shows the variance decomposition tables for the 3 variables used in the analysis. Table {\ref 3} shows the variance decomposition for tertiary education. The results show that less than 5\% of the shocks in tertiary education is explained by economic growth and physical capital investment throughout the period chosen. This confirms that either investment or economic growth do not cause education.\par Deviations in investment are a result of tertiary education starting from the second period. The effect of tertiary education on investment significantly increases over time suggesting that investment significantly causes tertiary education. Economic growth only explains a maximum of 13\% of deviations in tertiary education confirming that economic growth is not a significant cause of investment.\par Lastly, much of the deviations in economic growth are caused by investment, starting to contribute 11\% in the first period which gradually increases to a maximum of 33\% in the 4th period. This shows that investment is an important driver of economic growth as also confirmed by theory. Tertiary education is another important variable that significantly explains deviations in economic growth. It started off by contributing 11\% in the second period before rising to a maximum of 47\% in the 5th period which stabilises at that rate throughout the entire period. This result suggests that tertiary education causes economic growth.\par ii. Impulse Response Functions Appendix 2 shows the impulse response functions for tertiary education, investment and economic growth. The response of a variable to itself is highly significant in the initial periods before other variables become influential. The response of economic growth (PCRGDP) to tertiary education is positive and significant. The response of tertiary education to economic growth is insignificant. This shows that tertiary education is an important variable that influences economic growth. The response of economic growth to investment is also positive and significant. The response of investment to economic growth is insignificant. This shows that investment causes economic growth and not vice versa. The response of investment to tertiary education is significant while the response of tertiary education to investment is insignificant. This shows that tertiary education causes investment and not vice versa. \section[{VI. Conclusions And Policy Recommendations a) Conclusions}]{VI. Conclusions And Policy Recommendations a) Conclusions}\par The empirical results from granger causality tests, variance decomposition and impulse response functions confirm a uni-directional causality between education and economic growth in Zimbabwe. While education matters for growth, the reverse is not equally true. This confirms that investing more resources in human capital development is vital for labour productivity and growth of the economy. This in turn will lead to poverty reduction. The results also confirm that education can lead to economic growth through its impact on physical investment. Investing in human capital will lead to improvement in physical capital productivity which in turn leads to economic growth. A rise in human capital boosts the return on physical capital. Therefore, more resources should be put to the education sector, both public and private. \section[{b) Policy Recommendations}]{b) Policy Recommendations}\par The results from this study confirm that the education-economic growth relationship is a one way relationship. While education matters for economic growth, the reverse is not equally true. This result has a number of policy implications. The first one is that they support the role of human capital development in investment, economic growth and development. Therefore there is need to increase not only the quantity of resources but also the quality of resources into the education sector. This is in line with the Nziramasanga (1999) commission of inquiry into the education system in Zimbabwe which also recommends the need to increase resources into the education sector for it to contribute meaningfully to economic development. A more educated labour force will have a higher marginal productivity of labour and thus contributes more to national output. Investment in education should also be demand-driven as this will make it meet the demands of the industry in light of the dynamic nature of production methods. There is also need for adequate training even after tertiary education to ensure that education skills are more relevant for economic growth. Students at tertiary institutions also need a lot of mentoring well before they finish their education as this ensures that they adequately prepare themselves for their chosen fields and thus contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction.\par Emphasis should also be put on enlarging the participation of women in education as this is perceived to contribute more to economic growth through reduced fertility, late marriages and leads to a more educated future generation through the encouragement of children. This will significantly contribute to poverty reduction.\par Secondly, there is need for a shared responsibility in educating our population. This means that the private sector should also play a major role in the education sector through paying fees for students particularly the more vulnerable ones, like the girl-child and the orphans. They can also assist with infrastructure on education and that which is closely linked to education, food and education materials provision. This will enhance the impact of education on economic growth and poverty reduction. The private sector can also assist with the remunerations for staff since this has a bearing on their performance and the ultimate performance of the students.\par However, future studies can focus on using other measures of education such as those that focus on the quality of education rather than on the quantity. This study failed to do that due to data unavailability. Such measures include cognitive skills which show attainment rates for particular grades especially in mathematics and science, individuals' average years of schooling of population aged 25 and 64 and experience at work places. A strong rise in the years of education of a high quality is particularly relevant for economic growth but the challenge is that it is difficult to measure especially in developing countries such as Zimbabwe. To this end, high enrolment rates together with efficient use of financial resources are necessary but not exhaustive conditions for economic growth. \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png} \caption{\label{fig_0}Figure 1 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-3.png} \caption{\label{fig_1}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{3}\includegraphics[]{image-4.png} \caption{\label{fig_2}Figure 3 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.7157894736842104\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.0044736842105263155\textwidth}P{0.10289473684210526\textwidth}} alternative hypothesis. This means that there is\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ statistical evidence to accept the alternative hypothesis,\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ 1 H .\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ c) The Vector Autoregressive (VAR) model\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ 2012\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ M ay\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ H\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep :\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep m\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep is rejected against the\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: 3: 0 m H is rejected against the alternative hypothesis. This means that there is statistical evidence to accept the alternative hypothesis, 1 H . Similarly, if Y Granger causes X;]} \caption{\label{tab_0}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{1} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.12659574468085105\textwidth}P{0.1880851063829787\textwidth}P{0.01446808510638298\textwidth}P{0.08680851063829786\textwidth}P{0.1374468085106383\textwidth}P{0.14106382978723403\textwidth}P{0.155531914893617\textwidth}} Variable\tabcellsep ADF\tabcellsep test\tabcellsep 1\% critical\tabcellsep 5\% critical\tabcellsep 10\% Critical\tabcellsep Result\\ \tabcellsep Statistic\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Value\tabcellsep Value\tabcellsep Value\tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{3}{l}{PCRGDP -4.169580**}\tabcellsep -4.3382\tabcellsep -3.5867\tabcellsep -3.2279\tabcellsep Stationary (0)\\ LTEDU\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{-4.033913*** -4.3738}\tabcellsep -3.6027\tabcellsep -3.2367\tabcellsep Stationary(2)\\ LINV\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{-5.119735*** -2.6603}\tabcellsep -1.9552\tabcellsep -1.6228\tabcellsep Stationary\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_1}Table 1 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.5228301886792452\textwidth}P{0.05773584905660377\textwidth}P{0.15075471698113208\textwidth}P{0.11867924528301886\textwidth}} N Null Hypothesis\tabcellsep O Observations\tabcellsep F F--S Statistic\tabcellsep P Probability\\ DDLINV does not Granger Cause PCRGDP\tabcellsep 23\tabcellsep 2.49972*\tabcellsep 0.0900\\ PCRGDP does not Granger Cause DDLINV\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 0.74958\tabcellsep 0.5745\\ DDLTEDU does not Granger Cause PCRGDP\tabcellsep 23\tabcellsep 3.28621**\tabcellsep 0.0426\\ PCRGDP does not Granger Cause DDLTEDU\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 0.59217\tabcellsep 0.6740\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: ***Significant at 1\%, ** significant at 5\% and *significant at 10\%.]} \caption{\label{tab_2}Table 2 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{4} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}} Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy; MIT\\ Press, Cambridge, M A.\\ 15. Gupta, M.R and B. Chakraborty (2004): Human\\ Capital Accumulation and Endogenous Growth in a\\ Dual Economy; Economic Research Unit. Indian\\ Statistical Institute; Kolkata 700108, West Bengal,\\ India.\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_3}Table 4 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{5} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.04081920903954802\textwidth}P{0.2016949152542373\textwidth}P{0.2040960451977401\textwidth}P{0.19929378531073447\textwidth}P{0.2040960451977401\textwidth}} Period\tabcellsep S.E.\tabcellsep DDLTEDU\tabcellsep DDLINV\tabcellsep PCRGDP\\ 1\tabcellsep 2.592462\tabcellsep 0.040953\tabcellsep 10.96689\tabcellsep 88.99216\\ 2\tabcellsep 3.137341\tabcellsep 11.8007\tabcellsep 18.71127\tabcellsep 69.48803\\ 3\tabcellsep 3.994078\tabcellsep 25.50605\tabcellsep 31.25105\tabcellsep 43.2429\\ 4\tabcellsep 4.334513\tabcellsep 24.9317\tabcellsep 33.76839\tabcellsep 41.29991\\ 5\tabcellsep 5.417441\tabcellsep 47.36118\tabcellsep 25.5491\tabcellsep 27.08972\\ 6\tabcellsep 5.460858\tabcellsep 47.06743\tabcellsep 26.03614\tabcellsep 26.89643\\ 7\tabcellsep 5.478846\tabcellsep 47.39748\tabcellsep 25.87483\tabcellsep 26.72769\\ 8\tabcellsep 5.655308\tabcellsep 46.83071\tabcellsep 27.44988\tabcellsep 25.71941\\ 9\tabcellsep 5.704444\tabcellsep 46.03264\tabcellsep 27.844\tabcellsep 26.12337\\ 10\tabcellsep 5.826616\tabcellsep 47.25036\tabcellsep 27.60707\tabcellsep 25.14257\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_4}Table 5 :}\end{figure} \footnote{Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XII Issue VIII Version I © 2012 Global Journals Inc. (US)} \footnote{© 2012 Global Journals Inc. (US)Investigating the Causal Relationship between Education and Economic Growth in Zimbabwe} \footnote{A lag length of 4 was chosen using the Akaike Information Criteria.\hyperref[b8]{5} With a lag of 1, AIC=7.4675, with a lag of 2, AIC=7.5007, with a lag of 3, AIC=7.5698 and with a lag of 4, AIC is 7.4120.} \footnote{M ayGlobal Journals Inc. (US) Guidelines Handbook 2012 www.GlobalJournals.org} \backmatter \subsection[{Appendices}]{Appendices}\par Appendix 1 : Variance Decomposition Tables {\ref Table 3 :} \begin{bibitemlist}{1} \bibitem[ Journal of Monetary Economics]{b4}\label{b4} \textit{}, \textit{Journal of Monetary Economics} 34 p. 173. \bibitem[ Journal of Monetary Economics]{b7}\label{b7} \textit{}, \textit{Journal of Monetary Economics} 34 p. . \bibitem[ American Sociological Review]{b36}\label{b36} \textit{}, \textit{American Sociological Review} 60 (2) p. . \bibitem[ Discussion Paper Number]{b39}\label{b39} \textit{}, \textit{Discussion Paper Number} 23. Economics and Labour Market Analysis Department, ILO \bibitem[ American Economic Review]{b41}\label{b41} \textit{}, \textit{American Economic Review} 62 p. . \bibitem[Sims ()]{b40}\label{b40} \textit{}, C Sims . 1972. Money, Income, and Causality. \bibitem[Asteriou and Agiomirgianakis ()]{b0}\label{b0} \textit{}, D Asteriou , G M Agiomirgianakis . 2001. \bibitem[Springer-Verlag ()]{b10}\label{b10} \textit{}, Springer-Verlag . 2006. \bibitem[ Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences ()]{b14}\label{b14} \textit{}, \textit{Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences} 2009. 3. \bibitem[De Meulemeester and Rochat ()]{b15}\label{b15} ‘A Causality Analysis of the Link Between Higher Education and Development’. J L De Meulemeester , D Rochat . \textit{Economics of Education Review} 1995. 14 p. . \bibitem[Mankiw et al. ()]{b26}\label{b26} ‘A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth’. Gregory Mankiw , David Romer , David Weil . \textit{Quarterly Journal of Economics} 1992. 107 p. . \bibitem[Bo-Nai and Xiong-Xiang ()]{b9}\label{b9} \textit{A study on the rate of contribution of education investment to the economic growth in China; Front}, F Bo-Nai , Xiong-Xiang . 2006. 2006. 4 p. 521. \bibitem[Enders ()]{b16}\label{b16} \textit{Applied Econometric Time Series}, W Enders . 1995. \bibitem[Babalola (ed.) ()]{b2}\label{b2} \textit{Budget Preparation and Expenditure Control in Education}, J B Babalola . Babalola J.B. (ed.) 2003. Ibadan Awemark Industrial Printers. ((ed) Basic Text in Educational Planning) \bibitem[Central Statistical Office Publications: Various Publications between ()]{b11}\label{b11} \textit{Central Statistical Office Publications: Various Publications between}, 1980 and 2008. \bibitem[Bils and Klenow (2000)]{b8}\label{b8} ‘Does schooling cause growth?’. M Bils , P J Klenow . \textit{American Economic Review} 2000. December. 90 (5) p. . \bibitem[Francis and Iyare ()]{b17}\label{b17} ‘Education and Development in the Caribbean: A Cointegration and Causality Approach’. B Francis , S Iyare . \textit{Economics Bulletin} 2006. 15 (2) p. . \bibitem[Pradham ()]{b31}\label{b31} \textit{Education and Economic Growth in India: Using Error Correction Modelling}, Pradham . 2009. \bibitem[Sakamota and Powers ()]{b35}\label{b35} \textit{Education and the dual labour market for Japanese men}, A Sakamota , P A Powers . 1995. \bibitem[Psacharopoulos and Woodhall ()]{b32}\label{b32} ‘Education for Development: An Analysis of Investment Choice’. Psacharopoulos , M Woodhall . \url{http://www.eurojournals.com/irjfe\textunderscore 25\textunderscore 11.pdf.30} \textit{International Research Journal of Finance and Economics} 2009. 1997. New York Oxford University Press. 25. \bibitem[Selim ()]{b38}\label{b38} \textit{Employment-poverty linkages and pro-poor growth: A synthesis paper based on country studies of Bangladesh}, R Selim . 2006. Bolivia and Ethiopia. \bibitem[Romer ()]{b34}\label{b34} ‘Endogenous Technological Change’. P M Romer . \textit{Journal of Political Economy} 1990. 98 (5) p. . \bibitem[Evidence from Aggregate Cross-Country Data]{b6}\label{b6} \textit{Evidence from Aggregate Cross-Country Data}, \bibitem[Jaoul (2004)]{b21}\label{b21} ‘Higher education, causality and growth: a comparison of France and Germany before the Second World War’. M Jaoul . \textit{Compare; A Journal of Comparative and International Education} 2004. 1 March 2004. 34 p. . \bibitem[Human Capital and Economic Growth: Time Series Evidence from Greece Journal of Policy Modeling]{b1}\label{b1} ‘Human Capital and Economic Growth: Time Series Evidence from Greece’. \textit{Journal of Policy Modeling} 23 p. . \bibitem[In and Doucouliagos ()]{b20}\label{b20} ‘Human Capital Formation and US Economic Growth: A Causality Analysis’. F In , C Doucouliagos . \textit{Applied Economics Letters} 1997. 4 p. . \bibitem[Chakraborty ()]{b12}\label{b12} \textit{Human Capital, Education Policy and Economic Growth and Productivity}, B Chakraborty . 2005. 46 p. . \bibitem[Katircioglu (2009)]{b22}\label{b22} ‘Investigating Higher-educationled Growth Hypothesis in a Small Island: Time Series Evidence from Northern Cyprus’. Katircioglu . \url{http://econ.anadolu.edu.tr/fullpapers/Katircioglu\textunderscore econanadolu2009.pdf} \textit{Anadolu International Conference in Economics}, 2009. 2009. June 17-19. (Paper presented at EconAnadolu) \bibitem[Schultz ()]{b37}\label{b37} \textit{Investment in Human Capital}, T W Schultz . 1971. New York: The Free Press. \bibitem[Nelson and Phelps ()]{b29}\label{b29} ‘Investment in Humans, Technological Diffusion and Economic Growth’. Richard Nelson , Edmund Phelps . \textit{American Economic Review} 1966. 56 p. . \bibitem[Rebelo ()]{b33}\label{b33} ‘Long Run Policy Analysis and Long Run Growth’. S Rebelo . \textit{Journal of Political Economy} 1991. 99 (3) p. . \bibitem[Musibau ()]{b28}\label{b28} \textit{Long Run Relationship between Education and Economic Growth in Nigeria: Evidence from the Johansen's Cointegration Approach}, A B Musibau . 2005. \bibitem[Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education statistics provided upon request for the data from ()]{b27}\label{b27} \textit{Ministry of Higher and Tertiary Education statistics provided upon request for the data from}, 2006 to 2008. \bibitem[Lucas and Fr ()]{b25}\label{b25} ‘On the mechanics of economic development’. R E Lucas , Fr . \textit{Journal of Monetary Economics} 1988. 22 p. . \bibitem[Huang et al. ()]{b18}\label{b18} ‘Relationship between Scale of Higher Education and Economic Growth in China’. F Huang , L Jin , X Sun . \textit{Asian Social Science Journal} 2009. 5 (11) p. . \bibitem[Hunang and Jin ()]{b19}\label{b19} ‘Relationship between Scale of Higher Education and Economic Growth in China’. F Hunang , L Jin , SunX . \url{www.ccsenet.org/journal.html} \textit{Asian Social Science} 2009. 2009. 5 (11) . \bibitem[Nziramasanga ()]{b30}\label{b30} \textit{Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Education and Training}, C T Nziramasanga . 1999. Harare. \bibitem[Loening ()]{b24}\label{b24} \textit{The Impact of Education on Economic Growth in Guatemala}, L Loening . 2002. \bibitem[Kui ()]{b23}\label{b23} ‘The Interactive Causality between Education and Economic Growth in China’. L Kui . \url{http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\textunderscore id=920624} \textit{Working Paper Series} 2006. \bibitem[Chaudhary et al. ()]{b13}\label{b13} \textit{The Nexus between Higher Education and Economic Growth: An Empirical Investigation for Pakistan}, A R Chaudhary , A Iqbal , S Y Gillani . 2009. \bibitem[Benhabib and Spiegel ()]{b5}\label{b5} \textit{The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development}, Jess Benhabib , Mark Spiegel . 1994. \bibitem[Benhabib and Spiegel ()]{b3}\label{b3} \textit{The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development: Evidence from Aggregate Cross-Country Data}, J Benhabib , M Spiegel . 1994. \end{bibitemlist} \end{document}