IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pewipo/v18y2017i1p72-85n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ökonomische Wirkungen der Handwerksnovelle 2004: Ergebnisse einer Kontrollgruppenanalyse

Author

Listed:
  • Koch Andreas

    (nstitut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW)72074 TübingenOb dem Himmelreich 1Germany)

  • Nielen Sebastian

    (Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn53111 BonnMaximilianstraße 20Germany)

Abstract

Die Reform der Handwerksordnung des Jahres 2004 brachte insbesondere durch die Abschaffung der Meisterpflicht für mehr als die Hälfte der Gewerbezweige des Handwerks eine umfassende Liberalisierung der Zugangsbedingungen. Der vorliegende Beitrag analysiert unter Verwendung von Daten des Zentralverbandes des Deutschen Handwerks (ZDH) den Einfluss der Handwerksnovelle auf die Anzahl der Betriebe und die Ausbildungsleistung in den betroffenen Handwerken. Die Wirkungen der Handwerksnovelle werden durch das Differenz-von-Differenzen-Verfahren geschätzt, das darauf aufbaut, dass nur ein Teil der Gewerbezweige des Handwerks von der Reform betroffen war. Die Ergebnisse zeigen einen starken Anstieg der Anzahl der Betriebe und einen Rückgang der absolvierten Meisterprüfungen in den betroffenen Handwerken in Folge der Reform. Bezüglich der Ausbildungsleistung werden jedoch keine statistisch signifikanten Effekte ermittelt. Umfangreiche Robustheitsanalysen bestätigen diese Ergebnisse.

Suggested Citation

  • Koch Andreas & Nielen Sebastian, 2017. "Ökonomische Wirkungen der Handwerksnovelle 2004: Ergebnisse einer Kontrollgruppenanalyse," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 72-85, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pewipo:v:18:y:2017:i:1:p:72-85:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/pwp-2017-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/pwp-2017-0004
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/pwp-2017-0004?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bode, Eckhardt, 2003. "Die Reform der Handwerksordnung: Ein notwendiger Schritt in die richtige Richtung," Kiel Discussion Papers 404, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    2. Davud Rostam-Afschar, 2014. "Entry regulation and entrepreneurship: a natural experiment in German craftsmanship," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1067-1101, November.
    3. Dietz, Thomas, 2000. "Braucht der Kunde seinen Meister? Zur Deregulierung des Handwerks," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 80(3), pages 172-175.
    4. Karl Brenke, 2008. "Reform der Handwerksordnung: erfolgreich, aber viel zu halbherzig," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 77(1), pages 51-64.
    5. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Runst Petrik & Thomä Jörg, 2020. "Does Occupational Deregulation Affect In-Company Vocational Training? – Evidence from the 2004 Reform of the German Trade and Crafts Code," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 240(1), pages 51-88, January.
    2. Rostam-Afschar Davud, 2020. "Inklusive Beschäftigungspolitik: Fakten, Herausforderungen und neue Ideen zur Regulierung von Berufen," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 69(2), pages 129-139, August.
    3. Lukesch, Veronika & Zwick, Thomas, 2021. "Outside options drive wage inequalities in continuing jobs: Evidence from a natural experiment," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-003, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Runst, Petrik & Thomä, Jörg, 2018. "Does occupational deregulation affect in-company vocational training? – Evidence from the 2004 Reform of the German Trade and Crafts Code," ifh Working Papers 14/2018, Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    5. Haverkamp, Katarzyna, 2019. "Soloselbstständigkeit im Handwerk: Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2014," Göttinger Beiträge zur Handwerksforschung 29, Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).

    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. Andreas Koch & Sebastían Nielen, 2016. "Ökonomische Wirkungen der Handwerksnovelle 2004: Ergebnisse aus einem quasinatürlichen Experiment," IAW Discussion Papers 124, Institut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW).
    2. Kunwon Ahn & John V. Winters, 2023. "Does education enhance entrepreneurship?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 717-743, August.
    3. Philipp Lergetporer & Jens Ruhose & Lisa Simon, 2018. "Entry Barriers and the Labor Market Outcomes of Incumbent Workers: Evidence from a Deregulation Reform in the German Crafts Sector," CESifo Working Paper Series 7274, CESifo.
    4. Frank M. Fossen & Ray Rees & Davud Rostam-Afschar & Viktor Steiner, 2017. "How Do Entrepreneurial Portfolios Respond to Income Taxation?," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1673, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Frank M. Fossen & Ray Rees & Davud Rostam-Afschar & Viktor Steiner, 2020. "The effects of income taxation on entrepreneurial investment: A puzzle?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(6), pages 1321-1363, December.
    6. Müller, Klaus & Thomä, Jörg, 2015. "Bedeutung der qualifikationsgebundenen Zugangsberechtigung im Handwerk für die Funktionsfähigkeit des dualen Ausbildungssystems," Göttinger Beiträge zur Handwerksforschung 4, Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    7. Lisa Simon, 2019. "Microeconometric Analyses on Determinants of Individual Labour Market Outcomes," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 83.
    8. Frank Fossen & Ray Rees & Davud Rostam-Afschar & Viktor Steiner, 2017. "How Do Entrepreneurial Portfolios Respond to Taxation?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6558, CESifo.
    9. Gabriele Ruiu & Giovanna Gonano, 2020. "Religious Barriers to the Diffusion of Same-sex Civil Unions in Italy," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(6), pages 1185-1203, December.
    10. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    11. Jacques Pelkmans & Andrea Renda, "undated". "Does EU Regulation Hinder or Stimulate Innovation?," IRMO Occasional Papers 5, Institute for Development and International Relations, Zagreb.
    12. Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2019. "Effects of the Joint Custody Law in Italy," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 479-514, September.
    13. Susan Athey & Michael Luca, 2019. "Economists (and Economics) in Tech Companies," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 209-230, Winter.
    14. Daniel Fernandes & John G. Lynch & Richard G. Netemeyer, 2014. "Financial Literacy, Financial Education, and Downstream Financial Behaviors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 1861-1883, August.
    15. Graves Jennifer & McMullen Steven & Rouse Kathryn, 2018. "Teacher Turnover, Composition and Qualifications in the Year-Round School Setting," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(3), pages 1-27, July.
    16. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," Sciences Po publications 2020-03, Sciences Po.
    17. Alston Lee J. & Mueller Bernardo, 2018. "Priests, Conflicts and Property Rights: the Impacts on Tenancy and Land Use in Brazil," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-26, June.
    18. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    19. S Anukriti & Catalina Herrera‐Almanza & Praveen K. Pathak & Mahesh Karra, 2020. "Curse of the Mummy‐ji: The Influence of Mothers‐in‐Law on Women in India†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1328-1351, October.
    20. Ellison, Richard B. & Ellison, Adrian B. & Greaves, Stephen P. & Sampaio, Breno, 2017. "Electronic ticketing systems as a mechanism for travel behaviour change? Evidence from Sydney’s Opal card," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 80-93.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    C21; J24; K23; L5; Handwerk; Reform; Deutschland; Wirkungsanalyse; Ausbildung;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy

    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:bpj:pewipo:v:18:y:2017:i:1:p:72-85:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.