IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/kdifoc/v73y2016p1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implications of the Performance Evaluation of the Job Creation Project

Author

Listed:
  • Yun, Heesuk

Abstract

Industrial restructuring and the advent of a 4th industrial revolution are posing challenges that cannot be resolved by conventional methods. However, despite the increasing significance of Korea's Job Creation Project, which aims to foster adaptability and improve labor force mobility, practices remain outdated. Indeed, the project requires extensive reform to properly manage external challenges and to protect the individual not corporations, while stimulating the metabolic process within the economy. - Business entry and exit rate, which remained above 20% until the mid-2000s, have receded to around 10%, and job creation is centered around low-paid and lessskilled occupations, implying a weakening of economic activities. - The Job Creation Project should replace existing regulation-centered protection methods to encourage more activity, while eliminating concerns over change by protecting labor market dropouts. - In other words, the project should serve as a substitute for existing regulations while complementing labor reforms. - Of the target beneficiaries of the employment promotion subsidy, small-sized workplaces with less than five employees account for 54%, but given their constant difficulties of manpower shortages and poor employment conditions, it is almost meaningless to give them a subsidy in the name of employment promotion. - Practices of supporting incompetent companies with various incentives for fear of fewer jobs is no different that intentionally prolonging their survival and thus discriminating potential entrants and hindering the economic metabolic process. - Non-regular workers account for 32.5% of all employees, but only 1.8% were given training program provided by employers. - Market function has not been fully active due to the tight control of quantity and pricing of training programs and the shortage of fiscal support targets. Consequently, of those who completed vocational training for the unemployed, only one of ten is hired for the job he/she was trained for. - The strategy of predicting market trends, planning manpower supply and demand and selecting targets of government support might have worked effectively in the past, but it does not fit in with the present which demands individual creativity and voluntary conversion. - The lack of a unified performance management system is the main reason behind persisting job creation projects that are scattered broadly across ministries. Besides, project performance indicators such as the employment rate and wage are relatively easy to compile but still, a unified system for comparison has not been established. - Of 196 projects handled by 25 ministries, only 64% submitted basic statistics on users within the deadline of fact-finding survey, implying poor management. - Instead of controlling the quantity and fees of vocational training programs and the contents of employment services, the government needs to acknowledge private service providers, while compiling full performance data and linking them to financial upport. - A wide range of incentives must be made available to the disadvantaged who cannot gain employment without government support, and projects that merely support business because they are small or lack funds must be downsized.

Suggested Citation

  • Yun, Heesuk, 2016. "Implications of the Performance Evaluation of the Job Creation Project," KDI Focus 73, Korea Development Institute (KDI).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:kdifoc:v:73:y:2016:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.22740/kdi.focus.e.2016.73
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/200873/1/kdi-focus-73.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22740/kdi.focus.e.2016.73?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. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    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. Schulte, Patrick, 2015. "Does skill-biased technical change diffuse internationally?," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-088, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Jae Song & David J Price & Fatih Guvenen & Nicholas Bloom & Till von Wachter, 2019. "Firming Up Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(1), pages 1-50.
    3. Tommaso AGASISTI & Geraint JOHNES & Marco PACCAGNELLA, 2021. "Tasks, occupations and wages in OECD countries," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 160(1), pages 85-112, March.
    4. Francesco Trebbi & Miao Ben Zhang, 2022. "The Cost of Regulatory Compliance in the United States," NBER Working Papers 30691, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Loebbing, Jonas, 2018. "An Elementary Theory of Endogenous Technical Change and Wage Inequality," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181603, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    6. Keller, Elisa, 2019. "Labor supply and gender differences in occupational choice," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 221-241.
    7. Ellis Scharfenaker, Markus P.A. Schneider, 2019. "Labor Market Segmentation and the Distribution of Income: New Evidence from Internal Census Bureau Data," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2019_08, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    8. Bloom, Nicholas & Hassan, Tarek Alexander & Kalyani, Aakash & Lerner, Josh & Tahoun, Ahmed, 2021. "The diffusion of disruptive technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113870, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Davoine, Thomas & Mankart, Jochen, 2017. "Changes in education, wage inequality and working hours over time," Discussion Papers 38/2017, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    10. Rosario Crinò & Paolo Epifani, 2014. "Trade Imbalances, Export Structure and Wage Inequality," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(576), pages 507-539, May.
    11. Lewandowski, Piotr & Lipowska, Katarzyna & Smoter, Mateusz, 2023. "Mismatch in preferences for working from home: Evidence from discrete choice experiments with workers and employers," Ruhr Economic Papers 1026, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    12. Iftekhairul Islam & Fahad Shaon, 2020. "If the Prospect of Some Occupations Are Stagnating With Technological Advancement? A Task Attribute Approach to Detect Employment Vulnerability," Papers 2001.02783, arXiv.org.
    13. Pierre M. Picard & Alessandro Tampieri, 2016. "Income Effects and Vertical Differentiation in International Trade," DEM Discussion Paper Series 16-05, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    14. Boddin, Dominik & Henze, Philipp, 2015. "International trade and the occupational mix in manufacturing: Evidence from german micro data," Economics Working Papers 2015-05, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    15. John Carter Braxton & Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Jonathan Rothbaum & Lawrence Schmidt, 2021. "Changing Income Risk across the US Skill Distribution: Evidence from a Generalized Kalman Filter," Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Papers 55, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    16. repec:gdk:wpaper:51 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Francisco H G Ferreira & Sergio P Firpo & Julián Messina, 2022. "Labor Market Experience and Falling Earnings Inequality in Brazil: 1995–2012," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(1), pages 37-67.
    18. Franzini, Maurizio & Raitano, Michele, 2019. "Earnings inequality and workers’ skills in Italy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 215-224.
    19. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    20. Battisti, Michele & Gatto, Massimo Del & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2022. "Skill-biased technical change and labor market inefficiency," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    21. Bo E. Honoré & Luojia Hu, 2023. "The COVID-19 pandemic and Asian American employment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 64(5), pages 2053-2083, May.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:kdifoc:v:73:y:2016:p:1-10. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/kdiiikr.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.