Juan Chaparro
Juan Chaparro works as an associate professor in the School of Finance, Economics and Government at Universidad EAFIT (Medellín, Colombia). He holds a PhD in applied economics from the University of Minnesota and a BSc in economics from Pontificia Universidad Javeriana (Bogotá, Colombia). His research focuses on vocational training, the role of skills in the labour market, occupational classifications and early childhood development. He enjoys teaching game theory to both graduate and undergraduate students.
Follow Juan on
Website
Follow Juan on
Website
Juan Chaparro works as an associate professor in the School of Finance, Economics and Government at Universidad EAFIT (Medellín, Colombia). He holds a PhD in applied economics from the University of Minnesota and a BSc in economics from Pontificia Universidad Javeriana (Bogotá, Colombia). His research focuses on vocational training, the role of skills in the labour market, occupational classifications and early childhood development. He enjoys teaching game theory to both graduate and undergraduate students.
In their own words…
IEA – Can you tell us a little bit about your life story, what got you interested in economics, and how you decided to pursue an academic career?
Juan – I grew up in Bogotá, Colombia. I enjoyed the topics covered in social sciences and learning mathematics. I was fascinated by statistics and the possibility of measuring and understanding social phenomena. A couple of teachers gave me the advice of considering economics as my major in college back in 1997. It was great advice! Furthermore, I wanted to pursue an academic career because I like teaching. I also decided to focus my research agenda on labour economics because of the central role that labour opportunities play in the welfare of most households in any country. I returned to Colombia in 2016 and I’ve been able to do research and teach economics since then.
IEA – In your recent work, you study why firms create good job conditions, taking into account the cost of implementing them and their impact on wages and productivity. Can you briefly summarize your findings? What made you interested in this topic?
Juan – I studied the relationship between job conditions, wages and productivity with my colleague Eduardo Lora. We found evidence of a positive correlation between wages and job conditions using data from 18 countries in Latin America, which is the opposite of the compensated wage differentials hypothesis. We measured job conditions through self-reported questions such as whether there is someone at work who encourages the worker’s professional development, if the worker’s opinions are taken into account or if the worker as no fear of losing her job sometime in the following six months. We explained this empirical result using a principal – agent model which related wages, productivity and job conditions. Creating good job conditions might be costly for firms, but there is an economic return on worker’s productivity that firms should take into account. This finding is highly relevant in the context of low-productivity and low-wage firms in developing countries. Our paper was published in Applied Research in Quality of Life (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9489-0)
IEA – You featured in the book ‘Differential Effects of High-Quality Early Care: Lessons from the Infant Health and Development Program’, specifically on the differential effects of High-Quality Early Care from the Infant Health and Development Program. Can you briefly summarize your findings?
Juan – My research agenda on early childhood development has been joint work with Aaron Sojourner and Matthew Wiswall. The Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) was a randomized intervention carried out in the United States in the 1980s with the purpose of promoting the development of premature and low-birth weight infants. Families in the treatment group got access for free and high-quality childcare services for two years. Previous research on the IHDP found a strong positive effect of the intervention on cognitive development by age 3. Interestingly, the effect was stronger among low-income households where the mother had a low-educational attainment. We study the joint relationship between quantity and quality of care through a structural model of labour supply. We found there is an important trade-off between hours of parental care and quality of parental care. Access to free and high-quality child care services allows parents to partially cut back the hours of parental care and simultaneously increase the quality of such care, in terms of engaging activities which promote early cognitive development. In essence, parental effort is a constrained resource. The book “Sustaining Early Childhood Learning Gains” was published by Cambridge University Press (https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108349352) and an updated version of our research is now available as an NBER working paper (https://www.nber.org/papers/w26813).
IEA – Why is this research relevant today?
Juan – Investment in early childhood development can have large economic returns in the long run, but it requires the coordination of parental decisions, the provision of certain public services and institutional arrangements in the labour market. For example, one key job condition for working parents is schedule flexibility and parental leave policies. Both developed and developing countries are exploring ways to improve care services that also break historical gender norms on the distribution of household labour. Such is the case of the program “Manzanas del Cuidado” in Bogotá or the “Sistema Departamental del Ciudado” in Antioquia, both in Colombia. Understanding the constraints, joint decisions and biases faced by caregivers will improve public policies around care and labour markets around the world.
IEA – Why is it important for economic research to be diverse and inclusive?
Juan – One of the caveats in the economics profession, and academia in general, is its very strong pecking order. Hierarchy within economics is correlated with the quantity and quality of research, but many economists face strong barriers due to their socioeconomic background, gender, race, nationality or other personal characteristics. A more diverse and inclusive economics profession is necessary. More voices, from different backgrounds, will improve the quality and relevance of academic debates in economics. Scholars from different parts of the world can learn a lot from each other. The International Economic Association is working in this direction, but we can also contribute to this purpose in our professional relationship with students and colleagues.
One final comment on the language of research. English is the language we use to publish and disseminate academic research worldwide. However, economist who work in developing countries play an important role in creating high-quality research that is relevant for local policy debates. This research must be written and disseminated in the local language, which could be other than English; in my case, Spanish. The quality of economic research is not determined by the language in which papers are written. A more diverse and inclusive economics profession should recognize and promote high-quality research written in many different languages. ¡Que viva la diversidad en la ciencia económica!