Suchergebnisse
Filter
Format
Medientyp
Sprache
Weitere Sprachen
Jahre
158756 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
Disability Pensions and Active Labor Market Policy
In: Journal of social service research, Band 39, Heft 4, S. 572-584
ISSN: 1540-7314
Discretionary Measures of Active Labor Market Policy
In: Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Band 120, Heft 4, S. 537-565
ISSN: 2568-762X
Can Active Labor Market Policy Be Counter-Productive?
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 8551
SSRN
The Effectiveness of European Active Labor Market Policy
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 2018
SSRN
Active Labor Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis
In: CESifo Working Paper Series No. 2570
SSRN
Active Labor Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 4002
SSRN
Swiss Active Labor Market Policy Evaluation Dataset
This dataset was the basis for several studies. It includes individuals who are registered as unemployed at a Swiss regional employment agency in the year 2003. The data contains further information from different unemployment insurance databases (AVAM/ASAL) and social security records (AHV). Additionally, caseworkers employed in the period of 2003 to 2004 were surveyed through a written questionnaire in December 2004. The questionnaire asked about the caseworker's aims and strategies and information about the regional employment agency.
Active labor market policy evaluations: a meta-analysis
This paper presents a meta-analysis of recent microeconometric evaluations of active labor market policies. Our sample consists of 199 program estimates drawn from 97 studies conducted between 1995 and 2007. In about one-half of these cases we have both a short-term impact estimate (for a one-year post-program horizon) and a medium-term estimate (two-year horizon). We characterize the program estimates according to the type and duration of the program, the characteristics of the participants, and the evaluation methodology. Heterogeneity in all three dimensions affects the likelihood that an impact estimate is significantly positive, significantly negative, or statistically insignificant. Comparing program types, subsidized public sector employment programs have the least favorable impact estimates. Job search assistance programs have relatively favorable short-run impacts, whereas classroom and on-the-job training programs tend to show better outcomes in the medium-run than the short-run. Programs for youths are less likely to yield positive impacts than untargeted programs, but there are no large or systematic differences by gender. Methodologically, we find that the outcome variable used to measure program effectiveness matters. Evaluations based on registered unemployment durations are more likely to show favorable short-term impacts. Controlling for the outcome measure, and the type of program and participants, we find that experimental and non-experimental studies have similar fractions of significant negative and significant positive impact estimates, suggesting that the research designs used in recent non-experimental evaluations are unbiased.
BASE
Active labor market policy evaluations: a meta-analysis
This paper presents a meta-analysis of recent microeconometric evaluations of active labor market policies. Our sample consists of 199 program estimates drawn from 97 studies conducted between 1995 and 2007. In about one-half of these cases we have both a short-term impact estimate (for a one-year post-program horizon) and a medium-term estimate (two-year horizon). We characterize the program estimates according to the type and duration of the program, the characteristics of the participants, and the evaluation methodology. Heterogeneity in all three dimensions affects the likelihood that an impact estimate is significantly positive, significantly negative, or statistically insignificant. Comparing program types, subsidized public sector employment programs have the least favorable impact estimates. Job search assistance programs have relatively favorable short-run impacts, whereas classroom and on-the-job training programs tend to show better outcomes in the medium-run than the short-run. Programs for youths are less likely to yield positive impacts than untargeted programs, but there are no large or systematic differences by gender. Methodologically, we find that the outcome variable used to measure program effectiveness matters. Evaluations based on registered unemployment durations are more likely to show favorable short-term impacts. Controlling for the outcome measure, and the type of program and participants, we find that experimental and non-experimental studies have similar fractions of significant negative and significant positive impact estimates, suggesting that the research designs used in recent non-experimental evaluations are unbiased.
BASE
Active Labor Market Policy Evaluations – A Meta-analysis
This paper presents a meta-analysis of recent microeconometric evaluations of active labor market policies. Our sample consists of 199 program estimates drawn from 97 studies conducted between 1995 and 2007. In about one-half of these cases we have both a short-term impact estimate (for a one-year post-program horizon) and a medium-term estimate (two-year horizon). We characterize the program estimates according to the type and duration of the program, the characteristics of the participants, and the evaluation methodology. Heterogeneity in all three dimensions affects the likelihood that an impact estimate is significantly positive, significantly negative, or statistically insignificant. Comparing program types, subsidized public sector employment programs have the least favorable impact estimates. Job search assistance programs have relatively favorable short-run impacts, whereas classroom and on-the-job training programs tend to show better outcomes in the medium- run than the short-run. Programs for youths are less likely to yield positive impacts than untargeted programs, but there are no large or systematic differences by gender. Methodologically, we find that the outcome variable used to measure program effectiveness matters. Evaluations based on registered unemployment durations are more likely to show favorable short-term impacts. Controlling for the outcome measure, and the type of program and participants, we find that experimental and non-experimental studies have similar fractions of significant negative and significant positive impact estimates, suggesting that the research designs used in recent non-experimental evaluations are unbiased.
BASE
Can Active Labor Market Policy Be Counter-Productive?
In: CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP10270
SSRN
Working paper
The Political Economy of Active Labor-Market Policy
In: Politics & society, Band 38, Heft 4, S. 435-457
ISSN: 1552-7514
Active labor-market policies (ALMPs) have developed significantly over the past two decades across Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, with substantial cross-national differences in terms of both extent and overall orientation. The objective of this article is to account for cross-national variation in this policy field. It starts by reviewing existing scholarship concerning political, institutional, and ideational determinants of ALMPs. It then argues that ALMP is too broad a category to be used without further specification, and it develops a typology of four different types of ALMPs: incentive reinforcement, employment assistance, occupation, and human capital investment. These are discussed and examined through ALMP expenditure profiles in selected countries. The article uses this typology to analyze ALMP trajectories in six Western European countries and shows that the role of this instrument changes dramatically over time. It concludes that there is little regularity in the political determinants of ALMPs. In contrast, it finds strong institutional and ideational effects, nested in the interaction between the changing economic context and existing labor-market policies.
The Political Economy of Active Labor-Market Policy
In: Politics & society, Band 38, Heft 4, S. 435-458
ISSN: 0032-3292
Can active labor market policy be counter-productive?
In: Research in economics: Ricerche economiche, Band 69, Heft 1, S. 26-36
ISSN: 1090-9451