Evaluating job-search programs for old and young individuals: Heterogeneous impact on unemployment duration

Labour Economics

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 12-25

  Centeno, Luis ^a   Centeno, Mário ^b   Novo, Álvaro A ^b  

^a INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

^b BANCO DE PORTUGAL   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Active labor market program; Causal evaluation; Difference in differences estimators; Unemployment duration

Indexed keywords

EID: 59749094704     PISSN: 09275371     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2008.02.004     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abadie A. Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. Review of Economic Studies 72 1 (2005) 1-19
2. Addison J., Centeno M., and Portugal P. Reservation wages, search duration, and accepted wages in Europe. Working paper 13-04 (2004), Banco de Portugal
3. Ashenfelter O. Estimating the effect of training programs on earnings. Review of Economic and Statistics 60 (1978) 47-57
4. Augurzky B., and Schmidt C. The Propensity Score: A Means to an End (2001), IZA, Working paper
5. Becker S.O., and Ichino A. Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. The Stata Journal 2 4 (2002) 358-377
6. Blundell R., and Costa Dias M. Evaluation methods for non-experimental data. Fiscal Studies 21 4 (2000) 427-468
7. Blundell R., Dias M., Meghir C., and Reenen J.V. Evaluating the employment impact of a mandatory job search assistance program. Journal of the European Economic Association 2 4 (2004) 569-606
8. Bonnal L., Fougère D., and Sérandon A. Evaluating the impact of French employment policies on individual labour market histories. Review of Economic Studies 64 (1997) 683-713
9. Bryson, A., Dorsett, R., Purdon, S., 2002. The use of propensity score matching in the evaluation of active labour market policies. Working Paper 4, Policy Studies Institute and National Centre for Social Research.
10. Caliendo M. Microeconometric evaluation of labour market policies. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems (2006), Berlin Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag
11. Carling K., and Richardson K. The relative efficiency of labor market programs: Swedish experience from the 1990s. Labour Economics 11 3 (2004) 335-354
12. Centeno M., and Novo Á.A. Identifying unemployment insurance income effects with a quasi-natural experiment. Working paper 10/2007 (2007), Banco de Portugal
13. De Giorgi G. The New Deal for young people five years on. Fiscal Studies 4157 3 (2005) 371-388
14. Dehejia R., and Wahba S. Causal effects in non-experimental studies: re-evaluating the evaluation of training programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 94 448 (1999) 1053-1062
15. Dehejia R., and Wahba S. Propensity score matching methods for non-experimental causal studies. The Review of Economics and Statistics 84 1 (2002) 151-161
16. Eberwein C., Ham J., and LaLonde R. Alternative methods of estimating program effects in event history models. Labour Economics 9 2 (2002) 249-278
17. Eichler M., and Lechner M. An evaluation of public employment programmes in the East German state of Sachsen-Anhalt. Labour Economics 9 2 (2002) 143-186
18. Gerfin M., and Lechner M. A microeconometric evaluation of the active labour market policy in Switzerland. The Economic Journal 112 482 (2002) 854-893
19. Heckman J., and Hotz J. Choosing among alternative nonexperimental methods for estimating the impact of social programs: the case of manpower training. Journal of the American Statistical Association 84 408 (1989) 862-874
20. Heckman J., and Robb R. Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions: an overview. Journal of Econometrics 30 (1985) 239-267
21. Heckman J., Ichimura H., and Todd P. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Review of Economic Studies 64 4 (1997) 605-654
22. Heckman J., Ichimura H., Smith J., and Todd P. Characterizing selection bias using experimental data. Econometrica 66 5 (1998) 1017-1098
23. Heckman J., LaLonde R., and Smith J. The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In: Ashenfelter O., and Card D. (Eds). Handbook of Labor Economics vol. 3A (1999), North-Holland, Amsterdam 1865-2097
24. Katz L. Wage subsidies for the disadvantaged. In: Freeman R., and Gottschalk P. (Eds). Generating jobs: How to increase demand for less-skilled workers (1998), Russell Sage Foundation, New York 21-53
25. Kluve, J., 2006. The effectiveness of European active labor market policy. Working paper 2018, IZA.
26. LaLonde R. Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data. American Economic Review 76 4 (1986) 604-620
27. Lancaster T. The Econometric Analysis of Transition Data (1992), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
28. Larsson L. Evaluation of Swedish youth labor market programs. The Journal of Human Resources 38 4 (2003) 891-927
29. Lechner M. Earnings and employment effects of continuous off-the-job training in East Germany after unification. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 17 1 (1999) 74-90
30. Leuven, E., Sianesi, B., 2003. PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. URL http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html.
31. Meyer B.D. Natural and quasi-experiments in economics. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 13 (1995) 151-162
32. Michalopoulos C., Bloom H., and Hill C. Can propensity-score methods match the findings from a random assignment evaluation of mandatory welfare-to-work programs?. The Review of Economics and Statistics 86 1 (2004) 156-179
33. OECD. Live Longer, Work Longer (2006), Paris, OECD
34. Rosenbaum P., and Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70 (1983) 41-55
35. Rosenbaum P., and Rubin D. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician 39 1 (1985) 33-38
36. Rubin D. Assignment to a treatment group on the basis of a covariate. Journal of Educational Statistics 2 (1977) 1-26
37. Rubin D. Matched Sampling for Causal Effects (2006), Cambridge University Press
38. Rubin D., and Thomas N. Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice. Biometrics 52 1 (1996) 249-264
39. Sianesi B. An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990s. Review of Economics and Statistics 86 1 (2004) 133-155
40. Smith J., and Todd P. Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?. Journal of Econometrics 125 1-2 (2005) 305-353
41. van den Berg G., and Klaauw B.v.d. Counseling and monitoring of unemployed workers: theory and evidence from a controlled social experiment. International Economic Review 47 3 (2006) 895-936