02.06.2014 Views

Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ...

Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ...

Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

17<br />

Vella (1998), Heckman, Lalonde and Smith (1999), Blundell and Costa Dias (2000),<br />

Smith (2000). The aim here is to provide a brief introduction to <strong>the</strong> issues.<br />

1.3.1 <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>of</strong> programs<br />

<strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> program can focus on <strong>the</strong> microeconomic level, or on <strong>the</strong><br />

macroeconomic level. A microeconomic evaluation can look at <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> program<br />

upon <strong>the</strong> individual who has participated, such as whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y are in employment. A<br />

macroeconomic evaluation can examine <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>the</strong> program has on <strong>the</strong> economy as a<br />

whole, such as employment levels in <strong>the</strong> economy. In this <strong>the</strong>sis, only microeconomic<br />

evaluation is attempted. Substitution effects, and o<strong>the</strong>r indirect effects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> program,<br />

cannot be measured in microeconomic evaluation <strong>of</strong> program participants but only in a<br />

macroeconomic evaluation. However, demonstrating in a microeconomic evaluation<br />

whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> program has improved <strong>the</strong> employment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> targeted individuals is a<br />

necessary condition for establishing <strong>the</strong> potential for macroeconomic effects.<br />

Bryant (1978) succinctly introduces program evaluation, and <strong>the</strong> underlying concept that<br />

programs should be evaluated on <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> participant outcomes. The principal<br />

evaluation question is stated as:<br />

“To what extent are <strong>the</strong> participants better <strong>of</strong>f… as a result <strong>of</strong> participation<br />

than <strong>the</strong>y would have been if <strong>the</strong>re had been no such program.” (Bryant<br />

(1978): 44).<br />

In a microeconomic evaluation, participation is equated to <strong>the</strong> direct outcome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

program and non-participation equated to <strong>the</strong> outcome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ‘no program’ state<br />

(Heckman, Lalonde and Smith (1999): 1880). The most difficult problem facing <strong>the</strong><br />

evaluator is <strong>the</strong> problem <strong>of</strong> attribution. Experimental design can assist in attributing cause<br />

and effect, using randomisation <strong>of</strong> treatment and control status. Bryant (1978) however<br />

cautions that even in evaluations using experimental designs, <strong>the</strong>re can be restrictions on<br />

<strong>the</strong> generality <strong>of</strong> results and gives examples where this can arise due to <strong>the</strong> need to obtain<br />

voluntary cooperation, <strong>the</strong> artificiality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> treatment in a differently organized system

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!