<p>One of the best ways to study the benefit of speaking English, at least within an English speaking country, is by looking at the wage discrimination literature. Some, but not all, of wage discrimination turns out can be explained away by the <a href="http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/298006" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ability to speak English</a>. These studies are good to look at because of the controls for other factors. For example, it looks like the ability to speak English was a factor in this study, looking at before and after the impact of the <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.2307/2648111" rel="nofollow noreferrer">IRCA in the US</a>. The references I give of course are not generalizable to the whole world, because of their focus on the US. So I suggest looking more into the wage literature yourself.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-25T17:59:44.677Z
2017-08-27T16:32:19.097Z
2017-08-27T16:32:19.097Z
Kitsune Cavalry
<p>I think <a href="https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/167615/1/GLO-DP-0104.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this new paper</a> might be of interest to you.</p>

<p>The authors estimate the earnings advantage of workers that speak a second language, differentiating between native-born and foreign-born speakers. They evaluate this for 15 European countries, between 1994 and 2001. Their results are:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>First, for
  native-born workers with a tertiary diploma, using a foreign language at work is found to have
  an unambiguously positive impact on their earnings (2% on average).  Second, for foreign-
  born workers, however, returns to foreign language use at work is highly complementary
  to education.  Foreign language users below the upper secondary educational level earned
  significantly less (
  −
  8%) than those who use the local language at work. Third, with regard to
  language types, a linguistically distant foreign language gives native-born workers the highest
  wage premium, and EU official languages pays off the most for foreign-born workers. Fourth,
  our results do not show that lack of local language knowledge of low-educated migrants causes
  these results, as immigrants for whom the mother tongue is similar to the local language show
  a similar pattern.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The authors also perform a calculation of the annual wage <strong>loss</strong> from low skill foreign-workers not speaking the local language (as wages belong to GDP, this could partly be seen as a GDP loss, but it's not a very decent general equilibrium exercise in my opinion). The results below:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/6MgWl.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/6MgWl.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>Not only the article itself but the references of the article might be of interest to you. For example:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"Ginsburgh and Prieto-Rodriguez (2011) found that for native workers, English skills are well
  rewarded in Northern Europe, but much less rewarded in Southern Europe (for example, less
  than French and German in Italy, etc.)</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-29T12:31:42.867Z
2017-08-30T06:34:26.820Z
2017-08-30T06:34:26.820Z
luchonacho
<p>I'm very much interested in the difference between anglophonic and non-anglophonic countries stemming just from the language skills. I'll be grateful for any references regarding the topic.</p>

<p>What is the approximate annual economical gain of a country stemming purely from investments in English language classes?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-25T15:06:21.433Z
What exactly are you asking? Speaking English as a second language versus first language?
luchonacho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-25T15:27:08.263Z
@luchonacho Speaking English as a native language versus not speaking it as a native language (Those terms are confusing since often you hear people talking about bilinguals as speaking a language as L2)
Probably
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-26T09:08:03.190Z
Are you focusing on any specific geography? I believe the result could potentially be very different depending on the country. Certain industries might also have a higher benefit than others in speaking English (e.g. coding)
JoaoBotelho
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-26T20:03:32.543Z
@JoaoBotelho Yes, I'm extremely interested in the advantage of a country with more native (or pseudonative) English speakers. But my question aims at the differences amongst countries rather than individuals.
Probably
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-08-30T12:54:30.413Z
maybe these two links can give you some different insights :
https://news.uchicago.edu/article/2012/04/25/thinking-foreign-language-helps-economic-decision-making

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-the-language-you-speak-changes-your-view-of-the-world-10212854.html
optimal control
<reference-request><education-economics><demographics>
What is the economical advantage coming from the ability to speak English?
Probably
# What is the economical advantage coming from the ability to speak English?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-08-25)

I'm very much interested in the difference between anglophonic and non-anglophonic countries stemming just from the language skills. I'll be grateful for any references regarding the topic.

What is the approximate annual economical gain of a country stemming purely from investments in English language classes?

**Tags:** reference-request, education-economics, demographics

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: What exactly are you asking? Speaking English as a second language versus first language?  
> **username_0**: @username_1 Speaking English as a native language versus not speaking it as a native language (Those terms are confusing since often you hear people talking about bilinguals as speaking a language as L2)  
> **username_2**: Are you focusing on any specific geography? I believe the result could potentially be very different depending on the country. Certain industries might also have a higher benefit than others in speaking English (e.g. coding)  
> **username_0**: @username_2 Yes, I'm extremely interested in the advantage of a country with more native (or pseudonative) English speakers. But my question aims at the differences amongst countries rather than individuals.  
> **username_3**: maybe these two links can give you some different insights : https://news.uchicago.edu/article/2012/04/25/thinking-foreign-language-helps-economic-decision-making  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-the-language-you-speak-changes-your-view-of-the-world-10212854.html  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-08-29. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

I think [this new paper](https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/167615/1/GLO-DP-0104.pdf) might be of interest to you.

The authors estimate the earnings advantage of workers that speak a second language, differentiating between native-born and foreign-born speakers. They evaluate this for 15 European countries, between 1994 and 2001. Their results are:

> First, for
> native-born workers with a tertiary diploma, using a foreign language at work is found to have
> an unambiguously positive impact on their earnings (2% on average). Second, for foreign-
> born workers, however, returns to foreign language use at work is highly complementary
> to education. Foreign language users below the upper secondary educational level earned
> significantly less (
> −
> 8%) than those who use the local language at work. Third, with regard to
> language types, a linguistically distant foreign language gives native-born workers the highest
> wage premium, and EU official languages pays off the most for foreign-born workers. Fourth,
> our results do not show that lack of local language knowledge of low-educated migrants causes
> these results, as immigrants for whom the mother tongue is similar to the local language show
> a similar pattern.

The authors also perform a calculation of the annual wage **loss** from low skill foreign-workers not speaking the local language (as wages belong to GDP, this could partly be seen as a GDP loss, but it's not a very decent general equilibrium exercise in my opinion). The results below:

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/6MgWl.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/6MgWl.png)

Not only the article itself but the references of the article might be of interest to you. For example:

> "Ginsburgh and Prieto-Rodriguez (2011) found that for native workers, English skills are well
> rewarded in Northern Europe, but much less rewarded in Southern Europe (for example, less
> than French and German in Italy, etc.)


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2017-08-25. Score: 4

One of the best ways to study the benefit of speaking English, at least within an English speaking country, is by looking at the wage discrimination literature. Some, but not all, of wage discrimination turns out can be explained away by the [ability to speak English](http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/298006). These studies are good to look at because of the controls for other factors. For example, it looks like the ability to speak English was a factor in this study, looking at before and after the impact of the [IRCA in the US](https://link.springer.com/article/10.2307/2648111). The references I give of course are not generalizable to the whole world, because of their focus on the US. So I suggest looking more into the wage literature yourself.


---

