Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMuller, Paul
dc.contributor.authorvan der Klaauw, Bas
dc.contributor.authorHeyma, Arjan
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-03T08:30:27Z
dc.date.available2017-02-03T08:30:27Z
dc.date.issued2017-02
dc.identifier.issn1403-2465
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2077/51543
dc.descriptionJEL: J64, C14, C31sv
dc.description.abstractWe test whether different empirical methods give different results when evaluating job-search assistance programs. Budgetary problems at the Dutch unemployment insurance (UI) administration in March 2010, caused a sharp drop in the availability of these programs. Using administrative data provided by the UI administration, we evaluate the effect of the program using (1) the policy discontinuity as a quasiexperiment, (2) conventional matching methods, and (3) the timing-of-events model. All three methods use the same data to consider the same program in the same setting, and also yield similar results. The program reduces job finding during the first six months after enrollment. At longer durations, the quasi-experimental estimates are not significantly different from zero, while the non-experimental methods show a small negative effect.sv
dc.format.extent57sv
dc.language.isoengsv
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWorking Papers in Economicssv
dc.relation.ispartofseries691sv
dc.subjectempirical policy evaluationsv
dc.subjectjob-search assistancesv
dc.subjectunemployment durationsv
dc.titleComparing Econometric Methods to Empirically Evaluate Job-Search Assistancesv
dc.typeTextsv
dc.type.svepreportsv
dc.contributor.organizationDept. of Economics, University of Gothenburgsv


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record