Does the order and timing of active labour market programmes matter?

Michael Lechner, Stephan Wiehler, Mon, 10/15/2007



For the past twenty years, there has been a steady increase in the number of active labour market policy evaluation studies for Europe. So far, the majority of them have concentrated on the impact of a single programme compared to participation or to nonparticipation in other programmes. The authors of CEPR DP6521 use a more dynamic evaluation framework and extend the focus to issues such as the order and timing of programmes and the effects of programme sequences, i.e. multiple participation in the same programme, or different programmes.

The analysis is based on comprehensive administrative data from the Austrian labour market and is probably the first labour market evaluation study that deals with the issue of a dynamic programme allocation where participation in a later stage of a sequence may depend on earlier stages of the sequence and on intermediate outcomes. Among other results, the authors find that programme participation in active job search, qualification measures and course subsidies in the first and second trimester after the initial unemployment entry performs better in terms of reducing unemployment compared to participating in the third trimester. Moreover, active job search programmes are more effective after participating in a qualification measure, and less effective before such a programme. Overall, the paper provides a good first set of answers to questions of how programmes should be timed and how often or in what order they should be allocated.

DP6521 Does the Order and Timing of Active Labour Market Programmes Matter?

Journalists are entitled to free DP downloads on request; please contact [email protected]. To learn more about subscribing to CEPR's Discussion Paper Series, please visit the CEPR website.


Topics:  Labour markets

Tags:  Active Labour market policy, matching estimation, panel data, programme evaluation


CEPR Policy Research