Table 2 Macro-econometric evidence of the impact of ALMPs on unemployment and employment

Murtin and Robin (2013)

**

Same result obtained with a structural model.

De Serres and Murtin (2013)

**

ALMP spending, particularly on placement and employment services, reduces unemployment and its persistence over time.

Estevâo (2003)

**

ALMP spending increased business-sector employment rates in 15 OECD countries in the 1990s. ALMPs also fostered real wage moderation.

Bassanini and Duval (2006, 2009)

**

Spending on labour-market training lowers unemployment; high ALMP spending also reduces the increase in unemployment associated with generous unemployment benefits and negative shocks.

Baker, Glyn, Howell and Schmitt (2005)

No

ALMP effect insignificant.

Belot and Van Ours (2004)

**

ALMP spending on labour-market training lowers unemployment substantially, smaller negative impact for PES spending and none for subsidised jobs; higher spending on training reduces the negative impact of unemployment benefits in raising unemployment.

Fitoussi, Jestaz, Phelps and Zoega (2000)

**

ALMP spending reduces unemployment; the coefficient is insignificant when Sweden is excluded from the sample.

Bertola, Blau and Khan (2002a, 2002b)

n.a.

ALMPs only entered in interaction terms which generally are not significant.

Blanchard and Wolfers (2000)

n.a.

ALMP only entered in interaction terms; higher ALMP spending reduces the responsiveness of unemployment to negative shocks.

Elmeskov, Martin and Scarpetta (1998)

**

Replicates the finding in Scarpetta (1996) that ALMP spending has a small negative impact on unemployment, but a much bigger impact if Sweden is excluded from the sample. Presents evidence of significant interactions between ALMP spending and UI benefit replacement rates.

Nickell (1997, 1998)

**

For long-term unemployed only.

Scarpetta (1996)

**

Small impact on reducing unemployment that becomes larger and more significant with Sweden excluded.

OECD (2009)

*

Looks at the impact of ALMPs on unemployment dynamics; shows that the effectiveness of ALMP spending in raising the exit rate from unemployment depends on the business cycle; the effectiveness of jobseeker support and labour demand policies decreases in a depressed labour market while training becomes more effective.