Search

This paper analyzes the determinants of employability differences between short-term and long-term unemployed persons. Knowing these differences could help to address active labor market policy programs more adequately to the needs of the job-seekers in order to increase employment integration. Based on merged survey and register data differences in job finding chances of these groups are decomposed into a part due to differences in attributes and a part due to differences in valuing the attributes. The estimates clarify that current active labor market programs do not address important factors of employment. Particularly, health of the job seekers, limitations in the working ability and obstacles to employment comprising substance abuse, financial debts or care obligations for children or frail elderly play a significant role for successful placement. The conclusion is that policy makers should integrate these aspects in the placement process.

Based on new administrative data for Germany covering entrances into job creation schemes between July 2000 and May 2001, we evaluate the effects of this active labour market policy programme on the employability of the participating individuals. The programme effects are estimated considering the timing of treatment in the individual unemployment spell. Applying propensity score matching in a dynamic setting where the time until treatment in the unemployment spell is stratified into quarters, regional (East and West Germany) as well as gender differences are considered in the estimation. As matching is concerned with selection on observables only, we test the robustness of the estimates against possible unobserved influences. The results in terms of employment present a mixed picture. For West Germany, most of the estimates are insignificant at the end of the observation period, but positive exceptions are found for persons starting in the fifth or ninth quarter of the unemployment spell. For East Germany, none of the groups experiences an improvement of the labour market situation. Instead, the majority of the estimates establish negative employment effects until the end of the observation period (30 months after start of programmes). Hence, job creation schemes decrease the employment chances of the participating individuals.

In dieser Studie werden die Wirkungen von Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen (ABM) in Deutschland auf die individuellen Eingliederungswahrscheinlichkeiten der Teilnehmer in reguläre Beschäftigung evaluiert. Für die Untersuchung wird ein umfangreicher und informativer Datensatz aus den Datenquellen der Bundesagentur für Arbeit (BA) verwendet, der es ermöglicht, die Wirkungen der Programme differenziert nach individuellen Unterschieden der Teilnehmer und mit Berücksichtigung der heterogenen Arbeitsmarktstruktur zu untersuchen. Der Datensatz enthält Informationen zu allen Teilnehmern in ABM, die ihre Maßnahmen im Februar 2000 begonnen haben, und zu einer Kontrollgruppe von Nichtteilnehmern, die im Januar 2000 arbeitslos waren und im Februar 2000 nicht in die Programme eingetreten sind. Mit Hilfe der Informationen der Beschäftigtenstatistik ist es hierbei erstmals möglich, den Abgang in reguläre Beschäftigung auf Grundlage administrativer Daten zu untersuchen. Der vorliegende Verbleibszeitraum reicht bis Dezember 2002. Unter Verwendung von Matching-Methoden auf dem Ansatz potenzieller Ergebnisse werden die Effekte von ABM mit regionaler Unterscheidung und für besondere Problem- und Zielgruppen des Arbeitsmarktes geschätzt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen zwar deutliche Unterschiede in den Effekten für Subgruppen, insgesamt weisen die empirischen Befunde jedoch darauf hin, dass das Ziel der Eingliederung in reguläre ungeförderte Beschäftigung durch ABM weitgehend nicht realisiert werden konnte. JEL: C40 , C13 , J64 , H43 , J68

Previous empirical studies of job creation schemes in Germany have shown that the average effects for the participating individuals are negative. However, we find that this is not true for all strata of the population. Identifying individual characteristics that are responsible for the effect heterogeneity and using this information for a better allocation of individuals therefore bears some scope for improving programme efficiency. We present several stratification strategies and discuss the occurring effect heterogeneity. Our findings show that job creation schemes do neither harm nor improve the labour market chances for most of the groups. Exceptions are long-term unemployed men in West and long-term unemployed women in East and West Germany who benefit from participation in terms of higher employment rates. JEL: C13 , J68 , H43

"Job creation schemes (JCS) have been one important programme of active labour market policy (ALMP) in Germany for a long time. They aim at the re-integration of hard-to-place unemployed into regular employment. A thorough microeconometric evaluation of these programmes was hindered by the fact, that the available (survey) datasets have been too small to account for a possible occurrence of effect heterogeneity. However, identifying effect heterogeneity can help to improve the design and implementation of future programmes. Hence, we use an administrative dataset of the Federal Employment Agency, containing over 11,000 participants to analyse the employment effects of JCS on an individual level. Whereas in a previous paper we analysed these effects with respect to group-specific and regional heterogeneity, we focus here explicitly on effect heterogeneity caused by differences in the implementation of programmes. In particular, we first evaluate the effects with respect to the economic sector in which the JCS are accomplished. Second, we analyse if different types of promotion lead to different effects. And finally we examine if there are varying effects which can be attributed to different implementing institutions. The results are rather discouraging and show that JCS are in general not able to improve the re-integration chances of participants into regular employment." (author's abstract) Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen spielen in Deutschland seit langer Zeit eine wichtige Rolle bei der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik. Sie verfolgen das Ziel, schwer vermittelbare Arbeitslose in reguläre Beschäftigung zu reintegrieren. Bisher waren die zur Verfügung stehenden Datensätze für mikroökonomische Wirkungsanalysen dieser Maßnahmen zu klein, um mögliche Effektheterogenität zu berücksichtigen. Für ihre Analyse der Beschäftigungseffekte von Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen auf individuellem Niveau stützen sich die Autoren auf Daten der Bundesagentur für Arbeit (11.000 Personen). Während in ihren früheren Untersuchungen gruppenspezifische sowie regionale Heterogenität im Mittelpunkt stand, liegt der Schwerpunkt hier auf Effektheterogenität, die aus unterschiedlichen Realisierungen der Maßnahmen resultiert. Analysiert werden die Wirkungen von Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen in unterschiedlichen Wirtschaftssektoren, verschiedene Förderungsarten sowie institutionelle Unterschiede. Insgesamt kommt die Studie zu dem enttäuschenden Ergebnis, dass Arbeitsbeschaffungsmaßnahmen nicht geeignet sind, die Wiedereingliederungschancen von Arbeitslosen zu erhöhen. (IAB)

In this paper we evaluate the employment effects of job creation schemes on the participating individuals in Germany. Job creation schemes are a major element of active labour market policy in Germany and are targeted at long-term unemployed and other hard-to-place individuals. Access to very informative administrative data of the Federal Employment Agency justifies the application of a matching estimator and allows to account for individual (group-specific) and regional effect heterogeneity. We extend previous studies in four directions. First, we are able to evaluate the effects on regular (unsubsidised) employment. Second, we observe the outcome of participants and non-participants for nearly three years after programme start and can therefore analyse mid- and long-term effects. Third, we test the sensitivity of the results with respect to various decisions which have to be made during implementation of the matching estimator, e.g. choosing the matching algorithm or estimating the propensity score. Finally, we check if a possible occurrence of 'unobserved heterogeneity' distorts our interpretation. The overall results are rather discouraging, since the employment effects are negative or insignificant for most of the analysed groups. One notable exception are long-term unemployed individuals who benefit from participation. Hence, one policy implication is to address programmes to this problem group more tightly. JEL Classification: J68, H43, C13

This paper focuses on the effects of vocational training programmes on the duration of unemployment in Eastern Germany. We use information from administrative data of the Federal Employment Office. To allow for observable and possible unobservable influences we apply a multivariate mixed proportional hazard model. Furthermore, particular interest is spent on possible locking-in effects by separate estimation of in- and after-programme effects. Regarding several different programme durations our results show insignificant in- and after-programme effects for short-term programmes, insignificant in-programme and negative after-programme effects for mid-term programmes and negative in- and afterprogramme effects for long-term programmes.

This paper evaluates the effects of job creation schemes on the participating individuals in Germany. Since previous empirical studies of these measures have been based on relatively small datasets and focussed on East Germany, this is the first study which allows to draw policy-relevant conclusions. The very informative and exhaustive dataset at hand not only justifies the application of a matching estimator but also allows to take account of threefold heterogeneity. The recently developed multiple treatment framework is used to evaluate the effects with respect to regional, individual and programme heterogeneity. The results show considerable differences with respect to these sources of heterogeneity, but the overall finding is very clear. At the end of our observation period, that is two years after the start of the programmes, participants in job creation schemes have a significantly lower success probability on the labour market in comparison to matched non-participants. JEL Classification: H43, J64, J68, C13, C40