IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00370754.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

« L'évaluation expérimentale des programmes d'emploi et de formation aux Etats-Unis : éléments de critique interne »

Author

Listed:
  • Coralie Perez

    (CEREQ - Centre d'études et de recherches sur les qualifications - ministère de l'Emploi, cohésion sociale et logement - M.E.N.E.S.R. - Ministère de l'Education nationale, de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche)

Abstract

S'agissant des programmes d'emploi et de formation américains, les débats sont très vifs entre les tenants de l'évaluation expérimentale et ceux refusant la sélection aléatoire des participants. Tous s'accordent pourtant sur la nécessité de disposer d'un contrefactuel fiable permettant de figurer ce qu'il serait advenu des participants si le programme n'avait pas existé. En effet, il est admis qu'une évaluation doit mettre en évidence l'efficacité du programme, c'est-à-dire l'amélioration de la situation des participants consécutive et imputable au programme. En 1985 a été décidé l'évaluation du Job Training and Partnership Act (JTPA), programme d'emploi et de formation destiné aux « désavantagés économiques » jeunes et adultes. Cette évaluation, qui a produit ses premiers résultats en 1991, constitue une bonne illustration de l'intérêt et des limites d'une telle approche.

Suggested Citation

  • Coralie Perez, 2000. "« L'évaluation expérimentale des programmes d'emploi et de formation aux Etats-Unis : éléments de critique interne »," Post-Print halshs-00370754, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00370754
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00370754
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00370754/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1995. "Assessing the Case for Social Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 85-110, Spring.
    2. David H. Greenberg & Philip K. Robins, 1986. "The changing role of social experiments in policy analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(2), pages 340-362.
    3. Gary Burtless, 1995. "The Case for Randomized Field Trials in Economic and Policy Research," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 63-84, Spring.
    4. Laurie J. Bassi, 1983. "The Effect of CETA on the Postprogram Earnings of Participants," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 18(4), pages 539-556.
    5. Aaron, Henry J, 1989. "Politics and the Professors Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(2), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Burt S. Barnow, 1987. "The Impact of CETA Programs on Earnings: A Review of the Literature," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 22(2), pages 157-193.
    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. Aakvik, Arild & Heckman, James J. & Vytlacil, Edward J., 2005. "Estimating treatment effects for discrete outcomes when responses to treatment vary: an application to Norwegian vocational rehabilitation programs," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 15-51.
    2. Heckman, James J. & Lalonde, Robert J. & Smith, Jeffrey A., 1999. "The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1865-2097, Elsevier.
    3. Jeffrey Smith, 2000. "A Critical Survey of Empirical Methods for Evaluating Active Labor Market Policies," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 136(III), pages 247-268, September.
    4. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    6. Arild Aakvik & James J. Heckman & Edward J. Vytlacil, 2000. "Treatment Effects for Discrete Outcomes when Responses to Treatment Vary Among Observationally Identical Persons: An Application to Norwegian ..," NBER Technical Working Papers 0262, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. David H. Dean & Robert C. Dolan & Robert M. Schmidt, 1999. "Evaluating the Vocational Rehabilitation Program Using Longitudinal Data," Evaluation Review, , vol. 23(2), pages 162-189, April.
    8. Peter Gottschalk, 1997. "The Impact of Changes in Public Employment on Low Wage Labor Markets," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 397, Boston College Department of Economics.
    9. Smith, Jeffrey, 2000. "Evaluation aktiver Arbeitsmarktpolitik : Erfahrungen aus Nordamerika (Evaluating Avtive Labor Market Policies : Lessons from North America)," Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 33(3), pages 345-356.
    10. Jeffrey A. Smith, 2018. "The usefulness of experiments," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 436-436, May.
    11. Smith, Jeffrey, 2000. "Evaluation aktiver Arbeitsmarktpolitik : Erfahrungen aus Nordamerika (Evaluating Avtive Labor Market Policies : Lessons from North America)," Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 33(3), pages 345-356.
    12. Büttner, Thomas, 2008. "Ankündigungseffekt oder Maßnahmewirkung? Eine Evaluation von Trainingsmaßnahmen zur Überprüfung der Verfügbarkeit (Notification or participation : which treatment actually activates job-seekers? An ev," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 41(1), pages 25-40.
    13. Victor R. Fuchs & Alan B. Krueger & James M. Poterba, 1997. "Why do Economists Disagree About Policy?," NBER Working Papers 6151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Sianesi, Barbara, 2017. "Evidence of randomisation bias in a large-scale social experiment: The case of ERA," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 198(1), pages 41-64.
    15. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    16. Slemrod, Joel & Blumenthal, Marsha & Christian, Charles, 2001. "Taxpayer response to an increased probability of audit: evidence from a controlled experiment in Minnesota," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 455-483, March.
    17. Gani Aldashev & Georg Kirchsteiger & Alexander Sebald, 2017. "Assignment Procedure Biases in Randomised Policy Experiments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(602), pages 873-895, June.
    18. Peter R. Mueser & Kenneth R. Troske & Alexey Gorislavsky, 2007. "Using State Administrative Data to Measure Program Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(4), pages 761-783, November.
    19. Djebbari, Habiba & Smith, Jeffrey, 2008. "Heterogeneous impacts in PROGRESA," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1-2), pages 64-80, July.
    20. de Brauw, Alan & Hoddinott, John, 2011. "Must conditional cash transfer programs be conditioned to be effective? The impact of conditioning transfers on school enrollment in Mexico," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 359-370, November.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00370754. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.