Advertisement

Higher Education

, Volume 57, Issue 1, pp 71–84 | Cite as

The Social effects of the Australian Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS)

  • Gary Neil Marks
Article

Abstract

Australia’s Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) is an income contingent loan scheme, in which university students pay back part of the costs of their tuition after their post-university income reaches a certain threshold, is an important policy innovation for the financing of higher education. However, its critics claim that HECS increases socioeconomic inequalities in higher education and the HECS debt reduces the ability of young people to make the transitions to adulthood. This paper investigates these claims. There is no evidence that socioeconomic inequalities in higher education in Australia increased after the implementation of HECS in 1989 or the 1997 reforms. The magnitude of the HECS debt was found to have a negative impact on the transition to parenthood, but had no negative impacts on other transitions to adulthood: leaving the parental home, marriage and home ownership. Its effects on parenthood were moderate compared to other influences, such as full-time work in the previous year, marriage and being in a de facto relationship. Furthermore, only a small proportion of young people who attended university have large enough HECS debts for it to affect their fertility decisions.

Keywords

University Participation Student loans Australia Higher Education Contribution Scheme Socioeconomic inequality Transition to adulthood 

References

  1. ABS. (2005). Paying for university education. In Australian year book 2005 (Cat no. 1301.0). Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, L. (1999). Does HECS deter? Factors affecting university participation by low SES groups. Canberra: Higher Education Division, Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  3. Aungles, P., Buchanan, I., Karmel, T., & MacLachlan, M. (2002). HECS and opportunities in higher education. Draft working paper, Research, Analysis and Evaluation Group, Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra.Google Scholar
  4. AVCC. (2003). AVCC higher education news, legislation special. Canberra: Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee.Google Scholar
  5. Barr, N. (1998). Higher education in Britain and Australia: What lessons? Australian Economic Review, 31(2), 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barr, N. (2004). Higher education funding. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(2), 264–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Birch, E. R., & Miller, P. W. (2006). HECS and HECS-HELP: Equity issues. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(2), 97–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borland, J. (2002). New estimates of the private rate of return to university education in Australia. Melbourne Institute Working Paper, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010 Australia.Google Scholar
  9. Chapman, B. (1997). Conceptual issues and the Australian experience with higher income contingent charges for higher education. Economic Journal, 107(May), 738–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chapman B. (2004). A critical appraisal of the new higher education charges for students. Dialogue, Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia, 23(1), 61–72.Google Scholar
  11. Chapman, B., & Greenaway, D. (2006). Learning to live with loans? International policy transfer and the funding of higher education. The World Economy, 29(8), 1057–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman, B., & Ryan, C. (2005). The access implications of income-contingent charges for higher education: Lessons from Australia. Economics of Education Review, 24(5), 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chapman, B., & Salvage, T. (1997). Changes in costs for Australian education students from the 1996/97 budget. In J. Sharpham & G. Harman (Eds.), Australia’s future universities (pp. 50–74). Armidale: University of New England Press.Google Scholar
  14. Clarke, J., Zimmer, B., & Main, R. (1997). Under-representation in Australian education by the socioeconomically disadvantaged: Review of trends and issues and implications for university planning and practice. In Australian association for institutional research 8th international conference. Adelaide: AAIR.Google Scholar
  15. DES. (2004). The future of higher education student funding. United Kingdom: Department for Education and Skills.Google Scholar
  16. DEST. (2007). 2006 Full year higher education student data. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.Google Scholar
  17. DETYA. (2001). Higher education students time series tables. Selected higher education statistics 2000. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  18. Harman, G. (2003). A perspective on a decade of change. The national report on higher education in Australia. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson, N. O. (2002). The Higher Education Contribution Scheme: A HECS on ‘The Family?’ Journal of Population Research (Special Issue: The New Zealand and Australian Populations at the Millennium), 105–120.Google Scholar
  20. Jones, F. L., & McMillan, J. (2001). Scoring occupational categories for social research: A review of current practice, with Australian examples. Work, Employment and Society, 15(3), 539–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Long, M. (2002). Government financial assistance for Australian university students. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2), 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Long, M., & Hayden, M. (2001). Paying their way: A survey of Australian undergraduate university student finances. Canberra: Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee.Google Scholar
  23. Marginson, S. (2005). Educational markets and opportunity structures: The case of Australian higher education. Presented at ‘Transitions and risk: New directions in social policy’ Conference. Melbourne: Center for Public Policy.Google Scholar
  24. Marks, G. N., Headey, B., & Wooden, M. (2005). Household wealth in Australia: Its components, distribution and correlates. Journal of Sociology, 41(1), 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marks G. N., & McMillan, J. (2007). Changes in socioeconomic inequalities in university participation in Australia. In Y. Shavit, R. Arum, & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Stratification in higher education: A comparative study. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. NZMOE. (2004). Student loans. Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  27. OECD. (2004). Education at a glance. OECD indicators 2004. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  28. OECD. (2007). Education at a glance. OECD indicators 2007. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  29. Pearse, H. (2003). The social and economic impact of student debt. Carlton South, VIC: Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations.Google Scholar
  30. Watson, N. (2008). HILDA user manual—Release 6. Melbourne: Melbourne Institute for Applied Economic and Social Research.Google Scholar
  31. Yu, P., Kippen, R., & Chapman, B. (2007). Births, debts and mirages: The impact of The Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) and other factors on Australian fertility expectations. Journal of Population Research, 24(1), 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  2. 2.Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social ResearchUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations