Premium
Incomes after Job‐loss in the United States: From Programme Rules to Panel Data
Author(s) -
Denier Nicole,
Smith Michael R.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
social policy and administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1467-9515
pISSN - 0144-5596
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00826.x
Subject(s) - generosity , panel study of income dynamics , unemployment , incentive , poverty , welfare state , economics , welfare , labour economics , panel data , compensation (psychology) , demographic economics , comparative research , job loss , economic growth , political science , psychology , sociology , market economy , politics , anthropology , psychoanalysis , law , econometrics , microeconomics
Welfare state studies are usually motivated by one or both of two concerns: programme effects on the incidence of poverty, and the possibility of perverse incentive effects. Most research has been comparative, using cross‐national indicators from the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development and other international organizations. That research often contrasts the generosity of programmes in a number of European countries and the lack of it in the USA. Focusing on income transfers after job‐loss, in this article we critically examine the comparative evidence on US welfare state generosity and then use the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) to estimate what happens to job‐losers' incomes. The comparative analysis suggests conclusions more nuanced than found in much of the literature. The PSID analysis shows how the income effects of job‐loss vary across job‐losers and suggests that the role of unemployment compensation programmes in supporting incomes may be overstated.