Introduction
'Both the destination and the timing of young people's home-leaving are .... crucial in determining later life opportunities.' \citep*{Buck_1993}
Higher education defines the reason and therefore determines the destination for many young people leaving home. On the other hand the number of study courses in Germany increased in the last 10 years by 69% (HRK, 2017) and the dispersion of universities across all German cites gives young people the choice to either stay home or move out to achieve tertiary education. In section 2 we will review several papers, which try to identify the timing of leaving by comparing institutions and social environment across countries. Germany has a rich social welfare system, which tries to provide same possibilities for young people independent of their social background. We assume there have to be other driving factors beyond structural and social environment. Furthermore we hope to prove that these factors not only determine the decision process, they are also part of the individual's human capital, which has impact on their labor outcome, e.g. wage. Also the action of leaving could be seen as a facet of human capital itself, because it should widen the individual's social network and therefore endows her with another advantage comparing to the stay home alternative. The German Socioeconomic Panel gives us the chance not only to control for social heterogeneities, but also identify varieties in personality across the observed individuals. If we could access more detailed information on the households location, which was not possible due to the short time of conducting the research, we could also identify the variety in the dimension of the social structural break each leaving individual faces. This leaves us with the following reduced form of a possible research structure on this question: Starting with a review of the related literature in section 2, we continue by introducing a basic Roy framework\cite{ROY1951d} for the decision process, section 4 lays out our estimation strategy, section 5 will describe our results and in the last section we gonna conclude and draw further research possibilities.
Literature Review
The relevant literature concentrates in principal on varieties in social, institutional and cultural varieties across countries. This field of literature was initiated by \cite{Kiernan1986}, comparing the age of moving out and the form of residence of young people in six European countries. She finds that young people in Denmark are the first ones to leave, followed by West Germany, France, the Netherlands, Ireland and the UK. Women leaving earlier than men appears across all of these six.
Several papers proof a systematic difference between geographical regions in Europe. \cite{Holdsworth2000} compares Britain and Spain and indicates the patterns \citep{Billari2001} find looking at cohorts born around 1960 in whole Europe. He states an increase of the leaving age north to south. While the eastern European countries match the tendency of the southern European countries. The median for leaving parental home in Nordic countries is around 20 for southern and eastern European countries around 27. Germany ranks in this data just behind the Nordic countries and on the same stage as France with a median around 22. Across all countries he finds that women leave earlier than men. The reason, young people leave home also differs systematically. In southern European countries children leave their parent’s home in a high share for forming a union with their partner and not before finishing education. In the Nordic countries and central European it is vice versa.
\citep{Aassve2002} show the same systematic difference by comparing ECHP data. They try to lead this pattern back to the difference in culture but also on the difference in welfare policies. They divide Europeo in three different welfare regimes:
Southern European Welfare Regime with low level of support for young people. Conservative Continental welfare regimes, which are France and Germany. The third class is defined as Liberal and Social Democratic Welfare Regimes, which include the Nordic Countries and the UK. For the Conservative, Liberal and Social Democratic welfare regime, they can't proof a significant pattern for family or individual income. While in southern European countries the individual income is highly significant for men and family income for woman. In anothery paper \citep{Aassve2002a}study US data and find the same reasons for leaving as in southern European countries. Therefore they design a model, similar to the one of job search, to determine the decision of moving out as the successful match on the marriage market. They argue that the income channels through the "good catch effect"(high income individuals get more marriage offers) on the probability to move out earlier.
\citep*{Laferr_re_2004} look at the rental assistance reform in France in 1992. The reform included an extension of the assistance from only families with children to all low income households, e.g. students. The number of households in 1992-1996 rose, compared to same period before the reform, by 3%. Out of the new formed households the share of households formed by students grew from 15% in the preceding 4 years to 19% in the following years. In \citep*{Laferrere_2004} he argues that this rise has to be interpret with caution, as student numbers increased in the same years due to the increase in young people finishing the High School.
Theoretical Framework
This chapter deals with the theoretical basis of our analysis, a simple Roy model setup. Introduced by Roy in 1951 the conceptual framework of the generalized Roy model provides the opportunity to explain self selection behavior by unobserved heterogeneity in the agent's characteristics \cite{Roy1951} . We will use this approach to illustrate the decision process of individuals to leave their parent's household during tertiary education. Note that we will follow the notation in \citealt*{Heckman_2005}.