Search results

In this chapter, we evaluate the employment effects of job-creation schemes (JCS) on the participating individuals in Germany. JCS 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 us to account for individual (group-specific) and regional effect heterogeneity. We extend previous studies for Germany in four directions. First, we are able to evaluate the effects on regular (unsubsidised) employment. Second, we observe the outcomes of participants and non-participants for nearly three years after the programme starts and can therefore analyse medium-term effects. Third, we test the sensitivity of the results with respect to various decisions that have to be made during implementation of the matching estimator. Finally, we check if a possible occurrence of a specific form 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 exception are long-term unemployed individuals who benefit from participation at the end of our observation period. Hence, one policy implication is to address the programmes to this problem group more closely.

A proposed explanation for why business creation is often found to increase in recessions is that there are two components to entrepreneurship – “opportunity” and “necessity” – the latter of which is mostly counter-cyclical. Although there is some agreement on the conceptual distinction between these two factors driving entrepreneurship, there is little consensus in the literature on empirical definitions. The goal of this chapter is to propose an operational definition of opportunity versus necessity entrepreneurship based on the entrepreneur's prior work status (i.e., based on previous unemployment) that is straightforward, based on objective information, and empirically feasible using many large, nationally representative datasets. We then explore the validity of the definitions with theory and empirical evidence. Using datasets from the United States and Germany, we find that 80–90% of entrepreneurs are opportunity entrepreneurs. Applying our proposed definitions, we document that opportunity entrepreneurship is generally pro-cyclical and necessity entrepreneurship is strongly counter-cyclical both at the national levels and across local economic conditions. We also find that opportunity vs necessity entrepreneurship is associated with the creation of more growth-oriented businesses. The operational definitions of opportunity and necessity entrepreneurship proposed here may be useful for distinguishing between the two types of entrepreneurship in future research.

The estimation of the effects of treatments – endogenous variables representing everything from child participation in a pre-kindergarten program to adult participation in a job-training program to national participation in a free trade agreement – has occupied much of the theoretical and applied econometric research literatures in recent years. This volume brings together a diverse collection of papers on this important topic by leaders in the field from around the world. This collection draws attention to several key facets of the recent evolution in this literature.

Early models of the functional distribution of income assume constant labor productivity among all individuals. Not until human capital theory developed did scholars take into account how productivity varied across workers. According to early human capital models, this variation came about because each individual invested differently in education and training. Those acquiring greater amounts of schooling and on-the-job training earned more. However, these models neglected why one person would get training while another would not. One explanation is individual heterogeneity. Some individuals are smarter, some seek risk, some have time preferences for the future over the present, some simply are lucky by being in the right place at the right time, and some are motivated by the pay incentives of the jobs they are in. This volume contains 10 chapters, each dealing with an aspect of earnings. Of these, the first three deal directly with earnings distribution, the next four with job design and remuneration, the next two with discrimination, and the final chapter with wage rigidities in the labor market.

We investigate how career disruptions in terms of job loss may impact morbidity for individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Combining unique, high-quality longitudinal data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) with matched employer–employee data, we focus on individuals diagnosed with T2D, who are established on the labor market and who lose their job in a mass layoff. Using a conditional difference-in-differences evaluation approach, our results give limited support for job loss having an impact on health behavior, diabetes progression, and cardiovascular risk factors.