IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ifauwp/1999_006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Self-employment grants vs. subsidized employment: Is there a difference in the re-unemployment risk?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Self-employment grants and employment subsidies are active labor market programs that aim at helping unemployed workers to escape unemployment by becoming self-employed or being hired at an initially reduced cost for the employer. In Sweden in the 1990's the participation rate in the self-employment program increased from virtually none to almost same as in the employment subsidy program. The advancement of the self-employment program is likely to be a result of (i) a change in the labor market program policy, and (ii) an increase in the supply of skilled unemployed workers. The justification for the policy change is unclear, however. The literature indicate that a rather specific group of unemployed workers may benefit from self-employment programs; Neither are there any strong reasons to believe in general that self-employment should be preferable to conventional employment through subsidies. We examine, ex post, the justification for the policy change by comparing the post-program duration of employment for the two programs. In addition, we focus in some detail on the outcome for female workers and workers of foreign citizenship. The reason for this is the explicit policy to direct those workers to self-employment. The data we study are the inflow to the two programs from June 1995 to December 1996. The program participants are followed to March 1999. The data contain detailed spell and background information on 9,043 unemployed workers who participated in the self-employment program and 14,142 who participated in the employment subsidy program. The second explanation, see (ii), for the increase in self-employment program implies a potentially serious selection problem. We discuss how the selection process may bias the effect estimate in the non-linear duration model that we use. Simulations help us to determine the magnitude of the selection bias in our application. Moreover, we exploit the existing behavioral heterogeneity across labor market offices to reduce the selection bias. We find that the risk of re-unemployment is more than twice as high for the subsidized employment program compared with the self-employment program. The large positive effect is, however, limited to male and female workers of Swedish origin. We thus conclude that the policy change in general has been successful, though we note that directing immigrant workers to self-employment is unlikely to improve the situation for this group of unfortunate workers on the Swedish labor market.

Suggested Citation

  • Carling, Kenneth & Gustafson, Lena, 1999. "Self-employment grants vs. subsidized employment: Is there a difference in the re-unemployment risk?," Working Paper Series 1999:6, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ifauwp:1999_006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifau.se/upload/pdf/se/to2000/wp99-6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meyer, Bruce D, 1990. "Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Spells," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 757-782, July.
    2. Franco Modigliani & Jean Paul Fitoussi & Beniamino Moro & Denis Snower & Robert Solo & Alfred Steinherr & Paolo Sylos Labini, 1999. "An Economist’s Manifesto on Unemployment in the European Union," Journal of Income Distribution, Journal of Income Distribution, vol. 8(2), pages 1-1, December.
    3. Carling, Kenneth & Edin, Per-Anders & Harkman, Anders & Holmlund, Bertil, 1996. "Unemployment duration, unemployment benefits, and labor market programs in Sweden," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 313-334, March.
    4. Narendranathan, W. & Stewart, M.B., 1989. "Modelling The Probability Of Leaving Unemployment: Competing Risks Models With Flexible Baseline Hazards," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 331, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    5. Carling, Kenneth & Soderberg, Hans, 1998. "An experimental comparison of gradient methods in econometric duration analysis," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 83-97, March.
    6. Bring, Johan & Carling, Kenneth, 1998. "Attrition and misclassification of drop-outs in the analysis of unemployment duration," Working Paper Series 2001:3, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    7. Cleveland, William S. & Devlin, Susan J. & Grosse, Eric, 1988. "Regression by local fitting : Methods, properties, and computational algorithms," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 87-114, January.
    8. Andersson, Fredrik, 1999. "Job flows in Swedish manufacturing 1972-1996," Working Paper Series 1999:4, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    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. Barbara Sianesi, 2001. "Differential effects of Swedish active labour market programmes for unemployed adults during the 1990s," IFS Working Papers W01/25, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Caliendo, Marco & Künn, Steffen, 2011. "Start-up subsidies for the unemployed: Long-term evidence and effect heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 311-331.
    3. Alessio Brown & Johannes Koettl, 2015. "Active labor market programs - employment gain or fiscal drain?," IZA Journal of Labor Economics, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-36, December.
    4. Michaelides, Marios & Benus, Jacob, 2012. "Are self-employment training programs effective? Evidence from Project GATE," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 695-705.
    5. Kluve, Jochen & Fertig, Michael & Jacobi, Lena & Nima, Leonhard & Schaffner, Sandra & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Card, David & Góra, Marek & Jensen, Peter & Leetmaa, Reelika & Patacchini, Eleonora & van , 2005. "Study on the effectiveness of ALMPs: Research project for the European Commission, DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. Final report," RWI Projektberichte, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, number 69929, March.
    6. Nuria Rodriguez-Planas†, 2007. "What Works Best For Getting The Unemployed Back To Work: Employment Services Or Small-Business Assistance Programmes? Evidence From Romania," Working Papers 2007-32, FEDEA.
    7. Jochen Kluve, 2006. "The Effectiveness of European Active Labor Market Policy," RWI Discussion Papers 0037, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
    8. von Greiff, Jenny, 2009. "Displacement and self-employment entry," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 556-565, October.
    9. repec:zbw:rwidps:0037 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Empirical Bayes methods; Employment duration; Program evaluation; Proxy variables; Selection bias; Simulations;

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C24 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models; Threshold Regression Models
    • J64 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Unemployment: Models, Duration, Incidence, and Job Search
    • J68 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Public Policy
    • J69 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Other

    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:hhs:ifauwp:1999_006. 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: (Ali Ghooloo). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ifagvse.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.