IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Evidenzbasierte Wirtschaftspolitik in Deutschland: Defizite und Potentiale

Moderne Evaluationsmethoden auf der Basis ökonometrischer Verfahren und randomisierter Feldexperimente machen es für immer mehr Politikbereiche möglich, die Wirksamkeit wirtschaftspolitischer Maßnahmen zu überprüfen. Gleichwohl sind diese Methoden in der deutschen Evaluationspraxis nicht der Standard. Andere Länder sind Deutschland in dieser Hinsicht voraus. Gerade vor dem Hintergrund knapper öffentlicher Mittel ist eine Verbesserung der Evaluationspraxis dringend geboten, um die Mittelverwendung auf solche Maßnahmen fokussieren zu können, deren Wirksamkeit nachgewiesen ist. In diesem Beitrag werden institutionelle Voraussetzungen für methodisch valide Wirkungsanalysen diskutiert und mögliche Schritte hin zu einer stärker evidenzbasierten Wirtschaftspolitik in Deutschland vorgeschlagen.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.iaw.edu/RePEc/iaw/pdf/iaw_dp_103.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Institut für Angewandte Wirtschaftsforschung (IAW) in its series IAW Discussion Papers with number 103.

as
in new window

Length: 28 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2014
Handle: RePEc:iaw:iawdip:103
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Ob dem Himmelreich 1, D-72074 Tübingen

Phone: (+49) 7071 98 96 -0
Fax: (+49) 7071 98 96 -99
Web page: http://www.iaw.edu/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2010. "The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is taking the Con out of Econometrics," CEP Discussion Papers dp0976, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  2. DiNardo, John & Lee, David S., 2011. "Program Evaluation and Research Designs," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier.
  3. Michael Bräuninger & Jochen Michaelis & Madlen Sode, 2013. "10 Jahre Hartz-Reformen," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201318, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
  4. Luc Behaghel & Bruno Crépon & Marc Gurgand, 2014. "Private and Public Provision of Counseling to Job-Seekers: Evidence from a Large Controlled Experiment," PSE - Labex "OSE-Ouvrir la Science Economique" halshs-01067926, HAL.
  5. Fitzenberger, Bernd & Speckesser, Stefan, 2000. "Zur wissenschaftlichen Evaluation der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland: Ein Überblick," ZEW Discussion Papers 00-06, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  6. John DiNardo & David S. Lee, 2010. "Program Evaluation and Research Designs," Working Papers 1228, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
  7. James J. Heckman & Seong Hyeok Moon & Rodrigo Pinto & Peter A. Savelyev & Adam Yavitz, 2009. "The Rate of Return to the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program," NBER Working Papers 15471, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Nikolay Nenovsky & S. Statev, 2006. "Introduction," Post-Print halshs-00260898, HAL.
  9. Imbens, Guido W. & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2008. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," IZA Discussion Papers 3640, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  10. Alan B. Krueger, 1999. "Experimental Estimates of Education Production Functions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 497-532.
  11. Lechner, Michael & Wunsch, Conny, 2011. "Sensitivity of matching-based program evaluations to the availability of control variables," CEPR Discussion Papers 8294, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  12. Franziska Kugler & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Wößmann, 2014. "Ökonometrische Methoden zur Evaluierung kausaler Effekte der Wirtschaftspolitik," Ifo Working Paper Series Ifo Working Paper No. 178, Ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
  13. Heyer, Gerd & Koch, Susanne & Stephan, Gesine & Wolff, Joachim, 2011. "Evaluation der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik: Ein Sachstandsbericht für die Instrumentenreform 2011 (Evaluation of active labor market programs : a summary of recent results for the German program refor," IAB Discussion Paper 201117, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
  14. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
  15. Michael Fritsch & Michael Wyrwich, 2012. "The Long Persistence of Regional Entrepreneurship Culture: Germany 1925-2005," Jena Economic Research Papers 2012-036, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  16. M. Ruth & K. Donaghy & P. Kirshen, 2006. "Introduction," Chapters, in: Regional Climate Change and Variability, chapter 1 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  17. 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.
  18. repec:sae:ecolab:v:16:y:2006:i:2:p:1-2 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Aaron Chatterji & Edward L. Glaeser & William R. Kerr, 2013. "Clusters of Entrepreneurship and Innovation," NBER Working Papers 19013, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. repec:iab:iabzaf:v:40:i:1:p:45-64 is not listed on IDEAS
  21. repec:pri:indrel:dsp01ms35t863r is not listed on IDEAS
  22. Arni, Patrick, 2012. "Kausale Evaluation von Pilotprojekten: Die Nutzung von Randomisierung in der Praxis," IZA Standpunkte 52, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  23. Eichhorst, Werner & Zimmermann, Klaus F., 2007. "Dann waren's nur noch vier… Wie viele (und welche) Maßnahmen der aktiven Arbeitsmarktpolitik brauchen wir noch? Eine Bilanz nach der Evaluation der Hartz-Reformen," IZA Discussion Papers 2605, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  24. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1998. "Evaluating the Welfare State," NBER Working Papers 6542, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iaw:iawdip:103. 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: (Rolf Kleimann)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.