IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ese/emodwp/em8-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the performance of means-tested benefits in Bulgaria

Author

Listed:
  • Tasseva, Iva Valentinova

Abstract

Little is known about the effectiveness of means-tested benefits in Bulgaria. Using individual and household level data, I analyse the performance of two social assistance and two means-tested child benefits. I find that the programmes reach a very small proportion of the households with incomes below a relative poverty line. Furthermore, the transfers are characterized with very high non-take up and inclusion of non-entitled or non-poor recipients. Poverty rates decrease by a small degree among benefit clients and yet, the impact is insufficient to affect overall poverty, or for the benefits to achieve their ultimate goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Tasseva, Iva Valentinova, 2012. "Evaluating the performance of means-tested benefits in Bulgaria," EUROMOD Working Papers EM8/12, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:ese:emodwp:em8-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/research/publications/working-papers/euromod/em8-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hernandez, Monica & Pudney, Stephen, 2007. "Measurement error in models of welfare participation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 327-341, February.
    2. Bargain, Olivier & Orsini, Kristian, 2006. "In-work policies in Europe: Killing two birds with one stone?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 667-697, December.
    3. Holly Sutherland & Francesco Figari, 2013. "EUROMOD: the European Union tax-benefit microsimulation model," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 1(6), pages 4-26.
    4. Dolls, Mathias & Fuest, Clemens & Peichl, Andreas, 2012. "Automatic stabilizers and economic crisis: US vs. Europe," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 279-294.
    5. Andreas Buehn & Friedrich Schneider, 2012. "Shadow economies around the world: novel insights, accepted knowledge, and new estimates," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(1), pages 139-171, February.
    6. Avram, Silvia, 2013. "Outcomes of social assistance in Central and Eastern Europe: a pre-transfer post-transfer comparison," ISER Working Paper Series 2013-18, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    7. Hugo Benitez-Silva & Moshe Buchinsky & John Rust, 2004. "How Large are the Classification Errors in the Social Security Disability Award Process?," NBER Working Papers 10219, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Peter Lynn & Annette Jäckle & Stephen P. Jenkins & Emanuela Sala, 2012. "The impact of questioning method on measurement error in panel survey measures of benefit receipt: evidence from a validation study," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 175(1), pages 289-308, January.
    9. Lucia Mangiavacchi & Paolo Verme, 2013. "Minimum income in a transition economy," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 21(4), pages 683-712, October.
    10. Bruce D. Meyer & Wallace K. C. Mok & James X. Sullivan, 2015. "Household Surveys in Crisis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 199-226, Fall.
    11. Olivier Bargain & Herwig Immervoll & Heikki Viitamäki, 2012. "No claim, no pain. Measuring the non-take-up of social assistance using register data," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 10(3), pages 375-395, September.
    12. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-766, May.
    13. Henrik Jacobsen Kleven & Wojciech Kopczuk, 2011. "Transfer Program Complexity and the Take-Up of Social Benefits," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 54-90, February.
    14. Brewer, M & Etheridge, B & O'Dea, C, 2013. "Why are households that report the lowest incomes so well-off," Economics Discussion Papers 8993, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    15. Riphahn, Regina T, 2001. "Rational Poverty or Poor Rationality? The Take-Up Study of Social Assistance Benefits," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 47(3), pages 379-398, September.
    16. Duclos, Jean-Yves, 1995. "Modelling the take-up of state support," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 391-415, November.
    17. Matsaganis, Manos & Levy, Horacio & Flevotomou, Maria, 2010. "Non take up of social benefits in Greece and Spain," EUROMOD Working Papers EM7/10, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    18. Moffitt, Robert, 1983. "An Economic Model of Welfare Stigma," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(5), pages 1023-1035, December.
    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. Chrysa Leventi & Holly Sutherland & Iva Valentinova Tasseva, 2016. "Improving poverty reduction in Europe: what works (best) where?," ImPRovE Working Papers 16/16, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    2. Ekaterina Tosheva & Iva Tasseva & Dragomir Draganov & Venelin Boshnakov, 2016. "Effects of changes in tax-transfer system on households income distribution in Bulgaria: simulation analysis using EUROMOD for 2011-2015," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 51-71,72-91.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ese:emodwp:em8-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jonathan Nears). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rcessuk.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.