Meritocracy and Its Discontents: Long-run Effects of Repeated School Admission Reforms

TL;DR

This paper examines the long-term effects of implementing centralized meritocratic college admissions, revealing increased elite formation and occupational success but also highlighting increased inequality and urban bias.

Contribution

It provides the first historical analysis of nationwide centralized meritocratic admissions and its long-term impacts on social mobility and inequality.

Findings

Centralized meritocratic admissions increased the number of occupational elites.

The system led to greater urban-rural disparities in elite access.

Long-term rise in top income earners from the centralized system.

Abstract

What happens if selective colleges change their admission policies? We study this question by analyzing the world's first implementation of nationally centralized meritocratic admissions in the early twentieth century. We find a persistent meritocracy-equity tradeoff. Compared to the decentralized system, the centralized system admitted more high-achievers and produced more occupational elites (such as top income earners) decades later in the labor market. This gain came at a distributional cost, however. Meritocratic centralization also increased the number of urban-born elites relative to rural-born ones, undermining equal access to higher education and career advancement.