Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T11:17:46.860Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring the Macroeconomic Effects of Reducing Benefit Dependency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Ray Barrell ,
Simon Kirby ,
Rebecca Riley  and
Desirée van Welsum
Ray Barrell*
Affiliation:
National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Simon Kirby*
Affiliation:
National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Rebecca Riley*
Affiliation:
National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Desirée van Welsum
Affiliation:
National Institute of Economic and Social Research
*
e-mail: r.barrell@niesr.ac.uk
e-mail: s.kirby@niesr.ac.uk
e-mail: r.riley@niesr.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We construct a framework for evaluating the macroeconomic impact on the UK economy of policies that are aimed at reducing the number of people receiving social security benefits by helping them into employment. By means of model simulation we evaluate the gains to the economy in terms of output, employment and improvements to the public finances of a policy that reduces the number of people claiming disability benefits or lone parents on Income Support by 5 per cent. These gains can be regarded as significant and have to be offset against the costs of the policy. We conclude that it is possible to evaluate the impact of policies to enable benefit claimants to find work using a macroeconomic model, and that such an evaluation should be included in each assessment of policy change.

Type
Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 186 , October 2003 , pp. 85 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Desirée van Welsum is currently at the OECD. Her involvement in the paper preceded employment at the OECD and does not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the OECD or its member countries.

The authors are grateful to Rachel O'Brien, Bill Wells, Nigel Pain, Martin Weale and participants at a Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) seminar in July 2002 for helpful comments. Financial support from the DWP and the ESRC under grant L138250122 is gratefully acknowledged. The paper is based on DWP Social Research Branch in-house report no. 124.

References

Barrell, R. and Dury, K. (2003), ‘Asymmetric labour markets in a converging Europe: do differences matter?’ National Institute Economic Review, January.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrell, R. and Riley, R. (2002), ‘Sustainable Employment in the UK: The Impact of Policy, Skills and Technology’, NIESR, June.Google Scholar
Barrell, R., Dury, K., Hurst, A.l. and Pain, N. (2001), ‘Modelling the World Economy: The NIESR Model NiGEM’, presented at an ENEPRI workshop, Paris, July.Google Scholar
Barrell, R., Kirby, S., Riley, R. and van Welsum, D. (2003), Evaluating Labour Market Policies Aimed at Reducing the Number of Ben- efit Recipients, In-house report 124, Social Research Branch, Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Department for Work and Pensions (2001), Work and Pension Statistics 2001, DWP.Google Scholar
Heckman, J., LaLonde, R. and Smith, J. (1999), ‘The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs’, in Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (eds), Handbook of Labor Economics, 3A, Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckman, J., Lochner, L. and Taber, C. (1998), ‘General-equilibrium treatment effects: a study of tuition policy’, American Economic Review, 88, pp. 381–386Google Scholar
Kirby, S. and Riley, R. (2001), The Employment Effects of ONE: Interim Findings from the Full-Participation Phase, In-house report 88, Social Research Branch, Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Kirby, S. (2003), ‘The employment effects of full participation in ONE’, Part 3 in The final effects of ONE, Research Report No. 183, Department for Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Meyer, B.D. (2002), ‘Unemployment and workers' compensation programmes: rationale, design, labour supply and income support’, Fiscal Studies, 23, 1, pp. 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickell, S. and Quintini, G. (2001), ‘The recent performance of the UK labour market’, paper presented at a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Glasgow, 4 September.Google Scholar
NIESR (2002), The World Model Manual, mimeo, April.Google Scholar
Riley, R. and Young, G. (2000), New Deal for Young People: Implications for Employment and the Public Finances, Employment Service Research and Development Report, ESR62, December.Google Scholar
Sefton, J. (2000), ‘A solution method for consumption decisions in a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model’ Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 24, pp. 1097–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sefton, J. and Weale, M.R. (2003), ‘State pensions: means testing and public choice’, in Weale, M.R. (ed.), Pension Reform: Redistribution and Risk, London, NIESR, pp. 68–94.Google Scholar
Westerhout, E.W.M.T. (1995), ‘Arbeidsongeschikt of werkloos? Een verdeelmodel voor de inactiviteit’, CPB Onderzoeksmemorandum, 120.Google Scholar