"Degree inflation" appears to be a simple phenomenon on the surface: many job advertisements require a bachelor's or master's degree for routine or executive jobs whose tasks do not change radically over time.It reflects a shift in the logic of the distribution of opportunities within society, where a diploma becomes a social and economic "passport" and a job becomes a gateway governed by fast-track screening criteria that often measure not so much skill as the ability to access and afford education.In a report prepared by researchers from the Harvard Project on the Future of Work in partnership with other institutions, this process was characterized as "Degree Inflation": the rise in employer demand for a four-year college degree in jobs that have historically been "medium-skilled" and can be performed through apprenticeships or work experience, making the labor market less efficient and narrowing advancement pathways for large groups without a college degree (Fuller & Raman et al., 2017).The idea here is not that education is worthless, but rather that when a degree becomes a universal formal requirement, it becomes a soft exclusion tool that goes beyond its cognitive purpose and reproduces social inequality through channels that appear "neutral" but are not.
Theme 1: Degree inflation and the labor market
Degree inflation can be understood as a direct consequence of the way the labor market operates under the pressure of competition, unemployment, and technological changes. When the number of applicants for each job opportunity increases, employers tend to reduce the selection process through an easy "filter": the degree.This filter does not necessarily say that the degree holder is more qualified, but it does say that they have gone through a long process of discipline, commitment, and the ability to complete formal requirements, qualities that some employers believe are an indication of "seriousness" even if they are not directly related to the daily tasks of the job (Fuller, 2017).
After the economic crises, especially the Great Recession of 2008-2009, the tendency to raise requirements became more pronounced: companies tend to reduce risk, expand formal requirements, and use certification as a proxy for actual skills assessment, because skills assessment requires time, resources, and a training structure within the organization. This explains why "upskilling" has increased for jobs whose nature has not changed: the job itself is relatively static, but the number of applicants is larger, and management wants to reduce the screening burden (HBR, 2022).
In recent years, there has been a wave of "skills-based hiring" and promises to lower certification requirements, but recent reports indicate that actual implementation is still inconsistent: many companies announce a shift to skills, then return to certification as an implicit or explicit requirement, because organizational culture, hiring tools, and internal algorithms are still predisposed to certification screening (Burning Glass Institute, 2025a).With the introduction of artificial intelligence as an accelerator, entry-level jobs, which were previously a space to build experience without higher degrees, have become increasingly fragile, which exacerbates the rush of young people to seek a "higher degree" as a defense rather than a developmental option, and feeds a vicious cycle: the higher the degree requirement, the higher the quest for it, and the higher the number of degree holders, the lower its differential value, so the requirement rises again (Burning Glass Institute, 2025b).
Theme 2: Social Acceptance and Changing the Meaning of Success
In many societies, "success" has been linked to a school narrative: study, get a degree, gain status, and then get a respectable job. When the market's ability to fulfill this narrative is weakened, the narrative does not immediately collapse; rather, it turns into a more intense social pressure, as the certificate becomes the symbolic compensation for the fragility of reality.This is where the diploma comes in as a "title" that grants recognition: society may not guarantee a job, but at least it gives you the status of "educated," "university-educated," and "future-oriented." Over time, the social question becomes: "What do you have?" rather than "What can you do?" This shift redefines competence itself: competence becomes summarizable in a paper, not in an accomplishment.
In this context, degree inflation is the result not only of employers' decisions, but of an entire value system that associates dignity with a degree and marginalizes vocational and technical education pathways even if they are more closely related to actual need. The irony is that international data reminds us that education still yields a "return" on average, but this does not mean that every degree yields an equal return, nor that more degrees are always the best way to go.Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) reports generally show that higher levels of education are associated with higher average incomes across OECD countries, but this is still an aggregate average that does not eliminate the existence of specializations and sectors that are saturated or in low demand, nor does it eliminate the "mismatch" between education and job (OECD, 2024).
A highly sensitive social dimension emerges: when success becomes synonymous with a degree, the degree becomes a criterion of class distinction as well, because access to it depends on family resources, ability to pay, time, and a supportive environment.When the "social ladder" becomes restricted by the certificate, the exclusion of those who do not have it becomes the exclusion of certain segments, even if they possess equivalent or higher practical skills, which some recent discussions call the "paper ceiling" that prevents professional ascent due to the absence of paper rather than the absence of skill (Financial Times, 2024).
The third theme: The cost of education, debt, and discouragement among young people
When society convinces young people that a degree is a "guaranteed investment" and then they face a market that does not provide a return commensurate with the cost of that investment, education turns from a source of empowerment to a source of psychological and financial stress. In the United States, for example, the Federal Reserve's report on the economic well-being of families (SHED) discusses the issue of education debt among young people and shows how borrowing rates have changed over the years, with educational loans continuing to be an influential factor in life decisions and financial stability (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 2025).More recently, recent economic coverage points to the rise in total student loan debt in the United States and the return of default pressures after repayment resumes, reflecting how educational debt can become a long-term burden that limits housing, employment, and family formation options (Reuters, 2025).The broader meaning here is not limited to a specific country, but to a general logic: when the cost of education rises relative to the returns of graduate jobs, young people are stuck between two bitter choices: accepting a job that does not require their degree (which results in "futility" and "symbolic brokenness" after years of study), or continuing with higher education that may improve opportunities (which doubles the cost and accumulates disappointment).
The Burning Glass Institute reports that the widespread phenomenon of "under-qualified employment" among recent graduates is structural rather than temporary, and with it comes a widespread sense that a bachelor's degree alone is no longer as sufficient as many once thought, creating a rush to higher degrees even if they are not intrinsically required for the job (Burning Glass Institute, 2025b).This dynamic also generates two concomitant psychological effects: first, a sense of frustration that the "social promise" has not been fulfilled, and second, a sense of anxiety that the future seems to be a never-ending race: every time you get a degree, the bar is raised again. When this is repeated in environments that already suffer from high unemployment, low growth, and limited opportunities, education becomes more of a space to stack papers than a space to build transferable skills.
The bottom line is that degree inflation is not just a mistake in job advertisements. It is the result of the interaction of three forces: a labor market that tends to screen quickly and underinvest in training, a social culture that redefines success as an "educational title," and an economic reality that raises the cost of education and reduces the certainty of return.Therefore, the answer to the question "Why is a higher degree required for jobs that do not require it?" is not a single answer, but a web of reasons: the degree has become a tool to manage congestion in the labor market, a symbol of social acceptance, a psychological compensation for uncertainty, and at the same time a financial burden that increases the vulnerability of youth when education does not match the opportunity.Hence, a practical horizon can be proposed at the end of the paper: rehabilitating skill measures through practical tests, portfolios and paid training, developing socially respectable technical and vocational pathways, and improving the transparency of job advertisements to distinguish between "necessary requirements" and "preferences," because continued inflation means continued loss of the actual value of the degree, and the continued transformation of education from a means of social justice to a new channel for its reproduction in a different form.
Comments