IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea00/21760.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact Of Welfare Reform Across Metropolitan And Non-Metropolitan Areas: A Non-Parametric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mills, Bradford F.
  • Alwang, Jeffrey Roger
  • Hazarika, Gautam

Abstract

Recent public cash assistance reform measures designed to induce recipients to leave welfare and enter the workforce represent the most important change in social welfare policy in recent decades. Single female-headed families with children (SFHFwC), who represent 53 percent of non-metropolitan families with children living below the poverty line, are the major target group of reform measures. Recent studies have expressed concerns that heads of SFHFwC may face particular difficulties in transiting from welfare to work in non-metropolitan areas due to relatively weak demand for low skill female labor, greater childcare and transportation barriers to workforce participation, and economies of scale in the delivery of public programs to assist in transition. Despite these concerns, non-metropolitan SFHFwC have shown significant improvements in a number of economic indicators of family welfare since the initial implementation of reforms. However, the underlying causes of economic gains, and the relationship between gains and reform measures, remains unclear. This paper examines shifts from 1993 to 1999 in the distribution of real per-capita total receipts of non-metropolitan and metropolitan area SFHFwC with data from the U.S. Current Population Survey Annual Demographic Files. Nonparametric density estimates reveal a significant positive rightward shift in the per-capita distribution of total receipts of non-metropolitan SFHFwC occurred from 1993 to 1999. These gains are largely attributable to a rightward shift in the distribution of the earnings portion of total per-capita receipts, as the public assistance component of total receipts shifted leftward over the same period. The contributions of structural change in workforce welfare participation as well as underlying individual and area attribute shifts, are then examined using nonparametric density re-weighting methods. Specifically, five counterfactual experiments are conducted. The first experiment simulates the counterfactual distribution of non-metropolitan 1999 per-capita total receipts if the frequency of workforce welfare participation states in the 1999 data were at 1993 levels, but the distribution of per-capita receipts within each of four possible states of workforce and welfare participation remained at 1999 levels. The second counterfactual density simulates the 1999 non-metropolitan area distribution of per-capita receipts that would have prevailed if structural relationships between workforce welfare participation decisions and area and individual attributes were at 1993 levels, but area and individual attributes remained at 1999 levels. The third counterfactual experiment simulates the 1999 distribution of per-capita receipts that would have prevailed with both the 1993 structural relationship between workforce welfare participation and area and individual attributes and 1993 area and individual attribute levels. The fourth counterfactual experiment simulates 1999 distributions of per-capita receipts that would have prevailed if area unemployment and individual attributes in each workforce welfare state remained at 1993 levels, but the distribution of workforce welfare states were at 1999 levels. The final counterfactual density presents the 1999 per-capita receipts distribution that would have prevailed with 1999 workforce welfare participation rates arising from 1993 levels of unemployment in non-metropolitan areas. These experiments suggest that structural change in the relationship between area and individual attributes and workforce welfare program participation decisions from 1993 to 1999 accounts for only a small portion of observed shifts in total per-capita receipts. Changes in individual and area attributes, by contrast, account for much of the observed rightward shift in non-metropolitan per-capita total receipts from 1993 to 1999. Further, SFHFwC economic gains appear to arise from increased education levels and other individual attribute shifts, rather than more favorable area economic conditions. Gains should, therefore, be relatively resilient to future area economic downturns.

Suggested Citation

  • Mills, Bradford F. & Alwang, Jeffrey Roger & Hazarika, Gautam, 2000. "The Impact Of Welfare Reform Across Metropolitan And Non-Metropolitan Areas: A Non-Parametric Analysis," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21760, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea00:21760
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21760/files/sp00mi02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21760?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:etheor:v:8:y:1992:i:4:p:476-88 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. DiNardo, John & Fortin, Nicole M & Lemieux, Thomas, 1996. "Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A Semiparametric Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(5), pages 1001-1044, September.
    3. Rebecca M. Blank, 2001. "What Causes Public Assistance Caseloads to Grow?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 36(1), pages 85-118.
    4. Marron, J.S. & Schmitz, H.-P., 1992. "Simultaneous Density Estimation of Several Income Distributions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 476-488, December.
    5. J. P. Ziliak & D. N. Figlio & E. E. Davis & L. S. Connolly, "undated". "Accounting for the Decline in AFDC Caseloads: Welfare Reform or Economic Growth?," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1151-97, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    6. Jill L. Findeis & Leif Jensen, 1998. "Employment Opportunities in Rural Areas: Implications for Poverty in a Changing Policy Environment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1000-1007.
    7. Timothy J. Bartik, 1998. "The Labor Supply Effects of Welfare Reform," Upjohn Working Papers 98-53, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    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. Lawrence HADDAD & Michelle ADATO, 2002. "Maximizing benefit transfers to the poor: Evidence from South African employment programmes," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 141(3), pages 203-223, September.
    2. Haddad, Lawrence James & Adato, Michelle, 2001. "How effectively do public works programs transfer benefits to the poor?," FCND discussion papers 108, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Evelyn Blumenberg & Kimiko Shiki, 2004. "Spatial Mismatch outside of Large Urban Areas: An Analysis of Welfare Recipients in Fresno County, California," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 22(3), pages 401-421, June.

    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. Mills, Bradford F., 2002. "Changes In The Well-Being Of Nonmetropolitan Single-Mother Families: A Semi-Parametric Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Axelsen, Dan & Snarr, Hal W., 2006. "Analyzing Washington state's welfare program design, workfirst," MPRA Paper 37248, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Leone Leonida & Leone Leonida & Daniel Montolio, 2003. "Public Capital, Growth and Convergence in Spain. A Counterfactual Density Estimation Approach," Working Papers 2003/3, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    4. James P. Ziliak & David N. Figlio, 2000. "Geographic Differences in AFDC and Food Stamp Caseloads in the Welfare Reform Era," JCPR Working Papers 180, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    5. Riccardo Massari, 2009. "Is income becoming more polarized Italy? A closer look with a distributional approach," Working Papers 1, Doctoral School of Economics, Sapienza University of Rome.
    6. James Hines & Hilary Hoynes & Alan Krueger, 2001. "Another Look at Whether a Rising Tide Lifts All Boats," Working Papers 833, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    7. Frank Howell, 2000. "Prospects for 'Job Matching' in the Welfare-to-Work Transition: Labor Market Capacity for Sustaining the Absorption of Mississippi's TANF Recipients," JCPR Working Papers 202, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    8. J. P. Ziliak & C. Gundersen & D. N. Figlio, "undated". "Welfare Reform and Food Stamp Caseload Dynamics," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1215-00, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    9. Hal Snarr & Jeffrey Edwards, 2009. "Does income support increase abortions?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(4), pages 575-599, November.
    10. Jeffrey Grogger & Charles Michalopoulos, 2003. "Welfare Dynamics under Time Limits," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(3), pages 530-554, June.
    11. Leone Leonida & Antonio Giangreco & Sergio Scicchitano & Marco Biagetti, 2023. "Britain and BrExit: Is the UK more attractive to supervisors? An analysis of the wage premium to supervision across the EU," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(2), pages 291-312, June.
    12. Adam Looney, 2005. "The effects of welfare reform and related policies on single mothers' welfare use and employment," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2005-45, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    13. Corrado Andini, 2005. "Unemployment and Welfare Participation in a Structural VAR: Rethinking the 1990s in the United States (Revised)," HEW 0501005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. David Neumark & Mark Schweitzer & William Wascher, 2005. "The Effects of Minimum Wages on the Distribution of Family Incomes: A Nonparametric Analysis," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 40(4), pages 867-894.
    15. Jeffrey Grogger, 2004. "Time Limits and Welfare Use," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 39(2).
    16. Balaguer-Coll, Maria Teresa & Prior, Diego & Tortosa-Ausina, Emili, 2007. "On the determinants of local government performance: A two-stage nonparametric approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 425-451, February.
    17. Timothy J. Bartik, 2002. "Instrumental Variable Estimates of the Labor Market Spillover Effects of Welfare Reform," Upjohn Working Papers 02-78, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    18. C. Huang & I. Garfinkel & J. Waldfogel, "undated". "Child Support and Welfare Caseloads," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1218-00, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    19. Haider, Steven J. & Klerman, Jacob Alex, 2005. "Dynamic properties of the welfare caseload," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 629-648, October.
    20. James R. Hines & Hilary Hoynes & Alan B. Krueger, 2001. "Another Look at Whether a Rising Tide Lifts All Boats," Working Papers 833, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Economics;

    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:aaea00:21760. 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/aaeaaea.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.