IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudarb/122637.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rural, Suburban and Urban Single Mothers' AFDC and FSP Participation and Labor Supply: Lessons for Welfare Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Ranney, Christine K.

Abstract

Since passage of the Personal Responsibility and Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), states have the responsibility of developing and implementing their own Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) programs to operate in tandem with the Federal Food Stamp Program (FSP). The context for this welfare reform included a booming economy and broad public perception that welfare programs severely reduce the work effort of recipients. This study focuses on a period when the economy was in recession and investigates how the old cash welfare program, AFDC, and the FSP affected labor supply (weekly hours of work) decisions for single mothers, the majority of welfare recipients, across the rural-urban continuum. The central question is how the labor supply of single mothers responded to the availability of AFDC and FSP benefits, respectively, and whether their responses differed depending upon whether they reside in rural or urban areas. To answer this question, we utilize data from a special in-house Census Bureau extract from the Survey of Income and Program Participation with accurate rural and urban sub samples to estimate our three equations model, one for labor supply and one each for AFDC and FSP participation. The econometric model involves two linked components. The first is Bivariate Probit estimation of the AFDC and FSP participation decisions to account for possible correlation between the error terms of the participation equations. The participation estimates are linked to the second component, estimation of the labor supply equation, due to the endogeneity of the participation decisions and the possibility of bivariate selection. Single mothers may and do choose participation in either or both AFDC and the FSP and unobserved characteristics associated with those participation choices are likely to be negatively correlated with unobserved factors affecting labor supply. The participation estimates are used to calculate bivariate sample selection correction factors added as auxiliary variables in the labor supply equation. Because wages play important roles in all three equations, yet are observed only for women who work, we first impute wages based upon Heckman’s two-step sample selection bias correction procedure for rural and urban sub samples. The results show that bivariate rather than univariate participation estimation is necessary. The bivariate selection corrections in the labor supply equations, however, yield mixed results. Nonetheless, the estimated model reasonably explains linkages between AFDC and FSP programs and labor supply. The results show that increasing the AFDC tax on earnings by 10 percent generates almost identical average increases in labor supply by rural and urban single mothers, 0.12 and 0.11 hours per week, respectively. Their responses are also similar with respect to a 10 percent increase in the FSP earnings tax, 0.03 and 0.04 hours per week on average. A 10 percent increase in AFDC and FSP unearned income tax rates yield average rural labor supply increases of 0.11 and 0.02 hours per week, respectively, and corresponding urban responses of 0.01 and –0.02 hours per week. With one exception, rural and urban single mothers reduce hours of work as expected when AFDC and FSP guaranteed benefits increase by 10 percent. For the AFDC benefit increase, rural single mothers reduce labor supply less on average than do urban single mothers, -0.08 vs. -0.12 hours per week. The FSP benefit increase generates the largest reduction in labor supply, -0.35 hours per week for rural single mothers, compared to a labor supply increase of 0.14 hours per week by urban single mothers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ranney, Christine K., 2002. "Rural, Suburban and Urban Single Mothers' AFDC and FSP Participation and Labor Supply: Lessons for Welfare Reform," Research Bulletins 122637, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudarb:122637
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.122637
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/122637/files/Cornell_Dyson_rb0208.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.122637?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oral Capps & Randall A. Kramer, 1985. "Analysis of Food Stamp Participation Using Qualitative Choice Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(1), pages 49-59.
    2. Fraker, Thomas & Moffitt, Robert, 1988. "The effect of food stamps on labor supply : A bivariate selection model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 25-56, February.
    3. Sawhill, Isabel V, 1988. "Poverty in the U.S.: Why Is It So Persistent?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1073-1119, September.
    4. M. Keane & R. Mofitt, 1995. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," Working Papers 95-4, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    5. Keane, Michael & Moffitt, Robert, 1998. "A Structural Model of Multiple Welfare Program Participation and Labor Supply," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(3), pages 553-589, August.
    6. Maurice MacDonald, 1985. "The Role of Multiple Benefits in Maintaining the Social Safety Net: The Case of Food Stamps," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 20(3), pages 421-436.
    7. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    8. Daniel H. Weinberg, 1985. "Filling the "Poverty Gap": Multiple Transfer Program Participation," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 20(1), pages 64-89.
    9. Moffitt, Robert, 1983. "An Economic Model of Welfare Stigma," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(5), pages 1023-1035, December.
    10. Moffitt, Robert, 1986. "The Econometrics of Piecewise-Linear Budget Constraints: A Survey and Exposition of the Maximum Likelihood Method," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 4(3), pages 317-328, July.
    11. Wales, T J & Woodland, A D, 1980. "Sample Selectivity and the Estimation of Labor Supply Functions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(2), pages 437-468, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blundell, Richard & Macurdy, Thomas, 1999. "Labor supply: A review of alternative approaches," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1559-1695, Elsevier.
    2. Guyonne Kalb, 1998. "An Australian Model for Labour Supply and Welfare Participation in Two-Adult Households," Discussion Papers 0082, University of New South Wales, Social Policy Research Centre.
    3. H. Hoynes & R. Moffitt, "undated". "The effectiveness of financial work incentives in DI and SSI: Lessons from other transfer programs," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1073-95, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    4. Guyonne Kalb & Rosanna Scutella, 2003. "New Zealand Labour Supply from 1991-2001: An Analysis Based on a Discrete Choice Structural Utility Model," Treasury Working Paper Series 03/23, New Zealand Treasury.
    5. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb, 2005. "Discrete Hours Labour Supply Modelling: Specification, Estimation and Simulation," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 697-734, December.
    6. Dickert, Stacy & Houser, Scott & Scholz, John Karl, 1994. "Taxes and the Poor: A Microsimulation Study of Implicit and Explicit Taxes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 47(3), pages 621-638, September.
    7. Naveen Singhal, 2021. "Discrete Choice Models for Estimating Labor Supply: Working Paper 2021-04," Working Papers 57027, Congressional Budget Office.
    8. Guyonne R. Kalb, 2000. "Labour Supply and Welfare Participation in Australian Two-Adult Households: Accounting for Involuntary Unemployment and the 'Cost' of Part-time Work," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers bp-35, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    9. Hielke BUDDELMEYER & Guyonne KALB, 2008. "Labour Supply and Welfare Participation in the Australian Population: Using Observed Job Search to Account for Involuntary Unemployment," EcoMod2008 23800020, EcoMod.
    10. Guyonne Kalb, 2002. "Estimation of Labour Supply Models for Four Separate Groups in the Australian Population," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n24, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    11. Loeffler, Max & Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Siegloch, Sebastian & Sommer, Eric, 2014. "Documentation IZA?MOD v3.0: The IZA Policy Simulation Model," IZA Discussion Papers 8553, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Hoynes, Hilary Williamson & Schanzenbach, Diane Whitmore, 2012. "Work incentives and the Food Stamp Program," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 151-162.
    13. Tim Callan & A. Van Soest & John R. Walsh, 2007. "Tax Structure and Female Labour Market Participation: Evidence from Ireland," Papers WP208, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    14. van Soest, Arthur & Das, Marcel & Gong, Xiaodong, 2002. "A structural labour supply model with flexible preferences," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 107(1-2), pages 345-374, March.
    15. Hilary W. Hoynes & Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2009. "Consumption Responses to In-Kind Transfers: Evidence from the Introduction of the Food Stamp Program," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 109-139, October.
    16. van Soest, A.H.O. & Das, J.W.M. & Gong, X., 2000. "A Structural Labor Supply Model with Nonparametric Preferences," Other publications TiSEM 5e6f370d-3e08-48be-8a44-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Keane, Michael P. & Todd, Petra E. & Wolpin, Kenneth I., 2011. "The Structural Estimation of Behavioral Models: Discrete Choice Dynamic Programming Methods and Applications," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 4, pages 331-461, Elsevier.
    18. Janet Currie & Firouz Gahvari, 2008. "Transfers in Cash and In-Kind: Theory Meets the Data," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 333-383, June.
    19. Richard Blundell, 2011. "Viewpoint: Empirical evidence and tax policy design: lessons from the Mirrlees Review," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1106-1137, November.
    20. Michael P. Keane, 1995. "A new idea for welfare reform," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 19(Spr), pages 2-28.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Labor and Human Capital;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:cudarb:122637. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacorus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.