IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iso/educat/0042.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Kann man mit Gutscheinen die Weiterbildungsbeteiligung steigern? Resultate aus einem wissenschaftlichen Feldexperiment

Author

Listed:
  • Dolores Messer

    (Institute of Economics, University of Berne)

  • Stefan C. Wolter

    (Institute of Economics, University of Berne)

Abstract

Dieser Aufsatz fasst Resultate aus einem einzigartigen Experiment mit Weiterbildungsgutscheinen zusammen. Im Jahr 2006 wurden 2'400 Personen ein Weiterbildungsgutschein zugestellt, der sie zur Bezahlung einer frei gewaehlten Weiterbildung berechtigte. Das Nutzungsverhalten kann mit einer Kontrollgruppe von rund 14'000 Personen verglichen werden. Die Durchfuehrung des Feldexperimentes garantierte, dass sowohl Experimental-, wie Kontrollgruppe in ihrem natuerlichen Umfeld beobachtet werden konnten und sich nicht bewusst waren Teil eines Experimentes zu sein. Das Experiment zeigt, dass der Gutschein kausal eine Steigerung der Weiterbildungsbeteiligung von fast 20% bewirkt hat. Allerdings wird diese Steigerung mit einem Mitnahmeeffekt von ueber 60% erkauft, welcher die Effizienz der Massnahme in Frage stellt.

Suggested Citation

  • Dolores Messer & Stefan C. Wolter, 2009. "Kann man mit Gutscheinen die Weiterbildungsbeteiligung steigern? Resultate aus einem wissenschaftlichen Feldexperiment," Economics of Education Working Paper Series 0042, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
  • Handle: RePEc:iso:educat:0042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.business.uzh.ch/RePEc/iso/leadinghouse/0042_lhwpaper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Singer, Christine & Toomet, Ott-Siim, 2013. "On government-subsidized training programs for older workers," IAB-Discussion Paper 201321, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Feldexperiment; Weiterbildung; Gutscheine;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance; Financial Aid
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity

    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:iso:educat:0042. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sara Brunner (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isuzhch.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.