Regional differentiation of higher education outcomes and graduate employment: Evidence from Kazakhstan

Anel A. Kireyeva, A. E. Torebekov, Gulbakhyt Olzhebayeva, Ivan E. Digel, Elvira S. Nurekenova

Problems and Perspectives in Management, 2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.21511/ppm.24(1).2026.48
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Type of the article: Research ArticleAbstractDespite the growth of investments in higher education and innovative infrastructure in Kazakhstan, institutional and regional differences continue to shape heterogeneous outcomes in graduate employment. This study aims to assess the impact of higher education on the economic development and employment of graduates in Kazakhstan, while accounting for regional differences. The empirical research base is formed using official and publicly available statistical data from the Bureau of National Statistics and other government agencies of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period 2000–2024. The study employs panel data econometric methods, including fixed-effects models and extended specifications. The results of the analysis show that investments in fixed assets per capita are positively and statistically significantly related to the level of gross regional product (β = 0.2855; p < 0.01), while average wages do not have a statistically significant effect (p = 0.941). The higher education index and the level of urbanization have negative and statistically significant coefficients (p < 0.05), and innovation activity shows a positive effect only in alternative model specifications. The results obtained emphasize the importance of considering the institutional and spatial characteristics of regions when forming management policies in the field of higher education, youth employment, and regional economic development.AcknowledgmentsThis paper has been funded by the Science Committee MSHE RK (Grant “Modernization of the quality assurance system of higher education in Kazakhstan based on digitalization: development of approaches, mechanisms and information base” BR24992974).