Dealing with unemployment: What should be the role of labour market programs?

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Evidence Base

Australia and New Zealand School of Government

Subject: Management

GET ALERTS

eISSN: 1838-9422

DESCRIPTION

4
Reader(s)
13
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Related articles

VOLUME 2014 , ISSUE 4 (December 2014) > List of articles

  • |

Dealing with unemployment: What should be the role of labour market programs?

Jeff Borland *

Citation Information : Evidence Base. VOLUME 2014 , ISSUE 4 , ISSN (Online) 1838-9422, DOI: 10.21307/eb-2014-004, December 2014 © 2014.© The Australia and New Zealand School of Government

License : (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Published Online: 27-February-2017

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

This review presents a summary of evidence on outcomes from active labour market programs. Active labour market programs aim to increase the likelihood of employment for individuals who are unemployed or at risk of unemployment. The focus of this review is on studies of active labour market programs in Australia, supplemented with international evidence. An overview and historical background on active labour market programs is provided, as well as an introduction to the empirical methods used to estimate the effect of the programs. Evidence on the effects of the main types of programs – case management, work experience programs and formal education and training – is reviewed, and the main findings are distilled into a set of lessons for policy makers. The review concludes that active labour market programs cannot by themselves have a major impact on the rate of unemployment, but some spending on these programs is justified by outcomes such as increasing the pool of unemployed who are job ready and sharing the burden of unemployment. Job search and wage subsidy programs are suggested to be good ways to assist unemployed who are less disadvantaged. For unemployed with higher levels of disadvantage, priority should be given to programs that create jobs with opportunities for linked training, and that provide a pathway to a permanent job.

Content not available PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

REFERENCES

  1. Allard, T and Patty, A 2014. Tony Abbott’s work for the dole scheme doesn’t add up, Sydney Morning Herald, August 2, accessed at
  2. Ashenfelter, O, Ashmore, D and Deschenes, O 2005. Do unemployment insurance recipients actively seek work? Randomized trials in four U.S. states, Journal of Econometrics, 125, 53–75.
  3. Barrett, G and Cobb-Clark, D 2001. The labour market plans of parenting payment recipients: Information from a randomised social experiment, Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 4, 192–205.
  4. Behaghel, L, Crepon, B, and Gurgand, M 2014. Private and public provision of counselling to job seekers: Evidence from a large controlled experiment, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 6, 142–74.
  5. Behncke, S, Frolich, M, and Lechner, M 2010. Unemployed and their case workers: Should they be friends or foes? Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 173, 67–92.
  6. Bergemann, A and van den Berg, G 2006. Active Labour Market Policy Effects for Women in Europe: A Survey. IZA Discussion paper no. 2365.
  7. Bernhard, S and J Wolff, 2008. Contracting out Placement Services in Germany. IAB Discussion paper 5/2008.
  8. Besley, T and Coate S 1992. Workfare versus welfare: Incentive arguments for work requirements in poverty-alleviation programs, American Economic Review, 82, 249–61.
  9. Black, D, Smith, J, Berger, M, and Noel, B 2003. Is the threat of reemployment services more effective than the services themselves? Evidence from random assignment in the UI system, American Economic Review, 93, 1313–27.
  10. Blundell, R, Costa-Dias, M Meghir, C, and Van Reenen, J 2004. Evaluating the employment impact of a mandatory job search program, Journal of the European Economic Association, 2, 569–606.
  11. Borland, J and Tseng, Y 2007. Does a minimum job search requirement reduce time on unemployment payments? Evidence from the Jobseeker Diary in Australia, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 60, 357–78.
  12. Borland, J and Tseng, Y 2010. Can Mandatory Labour Market Programs Improve Labour Market Outcomes for Young Job Seekers? Compliance and Participation Effects from the Mutual Obligation Initiative in Australia, mimeo, University of Melbourne.
  13. Borland, J and Tseng, Y 2011. Does ‘Work for the dole’ work? An Australian perspective on work experience programs, Applied Economics, 43, 4353–68.
  14. Borland, J, Tseng, Y and Wilkins, R 2013. Does coordination of welfare services’ delivery make a difference for extremely disadvantaged jobseekers: Evidence from the YP4 trial, Economic Record, 89, 469–89.
  15. Breunig, R, Cobb-Clark, D, Dunlop, Y, and Terrill, M 2003. Assisting the long-term unemployed: Results from a randomized trial, Economic Record, 79, 84–102.
  16. Cahuc, P and Le Barbanchon, T 2010. Labor market policy evaluation in equilibrium: Some lessons of the job search and matching model, Labour Economics, 17, 196–205.
  17. Calmfors, L, Forslund, A and Hemstrom, M 2001. Does active labour market policy work? Lessons from the Swedish experiences, Swedish Economic Policy Review, 8, 61–124.
  18. Card, D, J Kluve, and Weber, A 2010. Active labour market policy evaluations: A meta-analysis, Economic Journal, 120, F452–77.
  19. Carling, K and Larsson, L 2005. Does early intervention help the unemployed youth? Labour Economics, 12, 301–19.
  20. Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training 1991. Annual Report 1990–91, AGPS, Canberra.
  21. Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs 1996a. Working Nation: Evaluation of the Employment, Education and Training Elements. EMB report 2/96.
  22. Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs 1996b. Reforming Employment Assistance, AGPS, Canberra.
  23. Commonwealth Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations 2010a. Labour Market Assistance: A Net Impact Study, mimeo, Evaluation and Program Performance Branch.
  24. Commonwealth Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations 2010b. STEP and Wage Assistance: A Net Impact Study, mimeo, Evaluation and Program Performance Branch.
  25. Commonwealth Department of Employment and Workplace Relations 2006. Customised Assistance, Job Search Training, Work for the Dole and Mutual Obligation – A Net Impact Study, Evaluation and Programme Performance Branch Report 1/2006.
  26. Commonwealth Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, 2000. Work for the Dole: A Net Impact Study, mimeo.
  27. Crepon, B, Duflo, E Gurgand, M Rathelot, R, and Zamora, P 2013. Do labor market policies have displacement effects? Evidence from a clustered randomized experiment, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128, 531–80.
  28. Davidson, P 2011. Did ‘work first’ work? The role of employment assistance programs in reducing long-term unemployment in Australia (1990–2008), Australian Bulletin of Labour, 37, 51–96.
  29. Davidson, P and Whiteford, P 2012. An Overview of Australia’s System of Income and Employment Assistance for the Unemployed, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers no.129.
  30. Dolton, P and O’Neill, D 1996. Unemployment duration and the restart effect: Some experimental evidence. Economic Journal, 106, 387–400.
  31. Economic Planning and Advisory Committee 1996. Future Labour Market Issues for Australia, AGPS, Canberra.
  32. Finn, D 2011. Sub-contracting in Public Employment Services, mimeo, The European Commission Mutual Learning Programme for Public Employment Services.
  33. Geerdsen, L 2006. Is there a threat effect of labour market programmes? A study of ALMP in the Danish UI system, Economic Journal, 116, 738–50.
  34. Gorter, C and Kalb, G 1996. Estimating the Effect of Counseling and Monitoring the Unemployed Using a Job Search Model, Journal of Human Resources, 31, 590–610.
  35. Greenberg, D, Michalopoulos, C, and Robins, P 2003. A meta-analysis of government-sponsored training programs, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57, 31–53.
  36. Greenberg, D, C Michalopoulos and P Robins, 2004. What happens to the effects of government-funded training programs over time?’ Journal of Human Resources, 39, 277–93.
  37. Griffiths, R and Durkin, S 2007. Synthesising the Evidence of Employment Zones, UK Department for Work and Pensions, Research report no. 449.
  38. Heckman, J, Heinrich, C, and Smith, J 2002. The performance of performance standards, Journal of Human Resources, 37, 778–811.
  39. Heckman, J, Lalonde, R and Smith, J 1999. The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In O Ashenfelter and D Card (eds), Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3A, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
  40. Hotz, J, Imbens, G and Klerman, J 2006. Evaluating the differential effects of alternative welfare-to-work training components: A reanalysis of the California GAN program, Journal of Labor Economics, 24, 521–66.
  41. Johnston, D 2007. An Evaluation of Australian Active Labour Market Programs, mimeo, University of Melbourne.
  42. Klepinger, D, Johnson, T, and Joesch, J 2002. Effects of unemployment insurance work-search requirements: The Maryland Experiment, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 56, 3–22.
  43. Kluve, J 2010. The effectiveness of European active labour market programs, Labour Economics, 17, 904–18.
  44. Kluve, J and Schmidt, C 2002. Can training and employment subsidies combat European unemployment? Economic Policy, 35, 410–448.
  45. Krug, G and Stephan, G 2013. Is the Contracting Out of Intensive Placement Services more Effective than Provision by the PES? Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment, IZA Discussion paper no. 7403.
  46. Lalonde, R 1995. The promise of public sector-sponsored training programs, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 149–68.
  47. Lechner, M and Smith, J 2007. What is the value added by caseworkers? Labour Economics, 14, 135–51.
  48. Lechner, M and Wiehler, S 2013. Does the order and timing of active labour market programmes matter? Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 75, 180–212.
  49. Lechner, M and Wunsch, C 2009. Are training programs more effective when unemployment is high? Journal of Labor Economics, 27, 653–92.
  50. Leigh, A 2008. Returns to education in Australia, Economic Papers, 27, 233–49.
  51. Lim, H, 2008. The Impact of Mutual Obligation on Mature Age Newstart Allowance Recipients: A Program Evaluation. NATSEM Discussion paper no.65.
  52. Martin, J 1998. What works among active labour market policies: Evidence from OECD countries’ experiences. In G Debelle and J Borland (eds.) Unemployment and the Australian Labour Market, Reserve Bank of Australia, Sydney.
  53. Manning, A 2009. You can’t always get what you pay for: The impact of the UK Jobseeker’s Allowance, Labour Economics, 16, 239–50.
  54. Meyer, B 1995. Lessons from the U.S. unemployment insurance experiments, Journal of Economic Literature, 33, 91–131.
  55. OECD 2001. Innovations in Labour Market Policies: The Australian Way, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  56. OECD 2005. Employment Outlook, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  57. OECD 2012. Activating Jobseekers: How Australia Does It, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  58. Petrongolo, B 2009. The long-term effects of job search requirements: Evidence from the UK JSA reform, Journal of Public Economics, 93, 1234–53.
  59. Productivity Commission 2002. Independent Review of Job Network – Draft Report, Canberra, Ausinfo.
  60. Reference Group on Welfare Reform 2000. Participation Support for a More Equitable Society, Final Report, Canberra.
  61. Richardson, J 1998. Do Wage Subsidies Enhance Employability? Evidence from Australian Youth, Discussion Paper no. 387, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, April.
  62. Richardson, L 2002. Impact of Mutual Obligation Initiative on the exit behaviour of unemployment benefit recipients: The threat of additional activities, Economic Record, 78, 406–421.
  63. Richardson, L 2003. The Mutual Obligation Initiative and the Income Support Dynamics of Youth Unemployment Benefit Recipients: An Empirical Analysis, unpublished Ph.D thesis, Australian National University.
  64. Schochet, P, Burghardt, J, and McConnell, S 2008. Does Job Corps work? Impact findings from the National Job Corps Study, American Economic Review, 98, 1864–86.
  65. Sianesi, B 2007. Differential effects of active labour market programs for the unemployed, Labour Economics, 15, 370–99.
  66. Stretton, A and Chapman, B 1990. An Analysis of Australian Labour Market Programs, Centre for Economic Policy Research, ANU, Discussion paper no. 247.
  67. Stromback, T and Dockery, M 2000. Labour Market Programs, Unemployment and Employment Hazards: An Application using the 1994–1997 Survey of Employment and Unemployment Patterns, Australian Bureau of Statistics, catalogue no. 6293.0.00.002.
  68. Taskforce on Strengthening Government Service Delivery for Job Seekers, 2011. Report to the Secretary of the Department of Employment, Education and Workplace Relations and the Secretary of the Department of Human Services, Canberra.
  69. United Kingdom Department of Work and Pensions 2012. Impacts and Costs and Benefits of the Future Jobs Fund, London.
  70. Van den Berg, G and Van der Klaauw, B 2006. Counseling and monitoring of unemployed workers: Theory and evidence from a controlled social experiment. International Economic Review, 47, 895–936.
  71. Van Ours, J 2002. The Lock-in Effect of Subsidized Jobs, IZA Discussion Paper no. 527.
  72. Webster, E 1998. Microeconomic evaluations of Australian labour market programs, Australian Economic Review, 31, 189–201.
  73. Wunsch, C and Lechner, M 2008. What did all the money do? On the general ineffectiveness of recent West German labour market programmes, Kyklos, 61, 134–74.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS

  • |