Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ...
Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ... Evaluation of the Australian Wage Subsidy Special Youth ...
30 2.1 Review of Australian wage subsidy evaluation evidence The brief overseas review in the first chapter showed relatively few evaluations of wage subsidies exist, and empirical evidence for wage subsidies is not well founded. As this section will show, wage subsidy programs in Australia also have little publicly available evaluation evidence. Microeconomic evaluation is selected, using individual data, addressing the issue of whether the subsidy leads to better employment experience for participants after the program ends. The evidence is limited to published items that can be accessed by the public. Only recent evidence is compiled, corresponding approximately to the period starting with the 1980’s and onward, since this is the period of the later analysis. However it becomes evident in reviewing the literature that in fact most programs only started within the 1970’s, and publicly available evaluation work occurred mostly in the mid-1980’s and l990’s. Paterson (1982) in discussing evaluation activities in Australia pointed out that “…In Australia government involvement in the area of manpower programs is a relatively new phenomenon. Experience with manpower program evaluation is therefore limited.” (Paterson (1982): 1). The timing of this statement marked the general beginning of Australian evaluation activities and publications. Wage subsidies form only a part of the array of labour market programs available, and so evaluation of these in turn forms only a small part of the existing Australian evaluation literature available. Evaluation evidence for other program types such as training for Australia can be found generally reviewed in Webster (1998, 1997a). Although subsidised apprenticeships were available, for example CRAFT (Commonwealth Rebate for Apprenticeship Full-time Training), these are not dealt with as they are deemed to be mostly a training subsidy. 4 Also not covered are programs with 4 In support of this, in references such as Kesteven (1987) and Hoy (1983) they are categorized as education programs. The design did allow for a small amount of on-the-job training. For example Merrilees (1984) refers to wage subsidies in CRAFT for this reason, however the grand focus was apprenticeship training.
31 limited applications, such as for special needs groups only, for example the disabled or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. This is because the limited application means such programs were not reasonably comparable i.e. a wage subsidy targeted to a reasonable extent of the population as the SYETP was. Because so few wage subsidy evaluations exist, some information about the existence of other wage subsidy programs in Australia is also provided even if no evaluation evidence could be found for them. SYETP is covered separately in the next section. However, SYETP was the first widespread wage subsidy program applied in Australia and so also the first wage subsidy program in Australia for which evaluation attempts were made. SYETP was not the only employment based program of ‘work experience’ available that was subsidy based, in 1983. Other, usually brief programmes, have also operated, sometimes alongside SYETP. SYETP was however by far the largest subsidy, making up 69.2 cent of all new programme placements (flow only) in 1980/81 (BLMR (1983) p16, table 3.1, final column). More recently, other subsidy programmes have been evaluated and the details of these are now presented. 2.1.1 Adult Wage Subsidy Scheme The list of labour market programmes compiled by Routley (1984) describes the Adult Wage Subsidy Scheme (AWSS), which was introduced during 1983. This programme briefly coexisted with SYETP within the National Employment and Training System (NEAT), an active labour market programme combining training and wage subsidies. Chapman (1985) p101 points out that AWSS was introduced by the outgoing Fraser Liberal government in response to the Australian recession starting after 1981, and initially retained by the incoming Hawke Labour government. Subsidies in amounts of up to $125 per week, for an up to 52 week period, were available to long term unemployed, further defined as “…adults who have been unemployed for a lengthy period” (Routley (1984): 3). BLMR (June 1984) p168 indicates that AWSS operated in a similar fashion to the extended SYETP in 1983-4, with a 17 week period at $100 per week followed by another 17 week period at $75 per week. Those aged over 24 with 8 of the last 12 months registered with the CES as unemployed and away from full-time education were eligible.
- Page 1: i Evaluation of the Australian Wage
- Page 5 and 6: v Declaration I hereby declare that
- Page 7 and 8: in method and assumptions. The orth
- Page 9 and 10: 3.3 Data and variables used for est
- Page 11 and 12: List of Tables and Figures Figure 1
- Page 13 and 14: Table A2.0b Univariate Probit of pa
- Page 15 and 16: xv Abstract The job subsidy Special
- Page 17 and 18: 1 1: Wage subsidy theory and evalua
- Page 19 and 20: 3 programs of providing benefits an
- Page 21 and 22: 5 The empirical methods used for th
- Page 23 and 24: 7 how the outcomes from these metho
- Page 25 and 26: 9 employment effect could be mainly
- Page 27 and 28: 11 Real Wage Employment Figure 1.1:
- Page 29 and 30: 13 are two types of unemployment, s
- Page 31 and 32: 15 Real wages are predetermined whe
- Page 33 and 34: 17 Vella (1998), Heckman, Lalonde a
- Page 35 and 36: 19 Each individual has two potentia
- Page 37 and 38: 21 this case, if there was no data
- Page 39 and 40: 23 correlation for the error of the
- Page 41 and 42: 25 Table 1.3 collects together some
- Page 43 and 44: 27 Table 1.3 Brief overview of rece
- Page 45: 29 necessarily brief. Then, the evi
- Page 49 and 50: 33 who participated. It was conclud
- Page 51 and 52: 35 term unemployed for over 12 of t
- Page 53 and 54: 37 importance of the subsidy second
- Page 55 and 56: 39 differences in characteristics t
- Page 57 and 58: 41 Matching methods are theoretical
- Page 59 and 60: 43 2.2 SYETP implementation As SYET
- Page 61 and 62: 45 In July1978, the subsidy was cal
- Page 63 and 64: 47 In January 1979, variations were
- Page 65 and 66: 49 benefits were paid at a slightly
- Page 67 and 68: 51 2.2.3 SYETP operation Earlier re
- Page 69 and 70: 53 ceiling constraints’ applied t
- Page 71 and 72: 55 Award Conditions for employment
- Page 73 and 74: 57 Harris (2001) claims that during
- Page 75 and 76: 59 display boards listed details of
- Page 77 and 78: 61 restriction was used. If there w
- Page 79 and 80: 63 to the end of the 1980’s. An o
- Page 81 and 82: 65 for teens overall had risen, emp
- Page 83 and 84: 67 for Australia using data from th
- Page 85 and 86: 69 training, can provide a form of
- Page 87 and 88: 71 employer survey estimates were t
- Page 89 and 90: 73 provisions for SYETP and extende
- Page 91 and 92: 75 withdrawals occurred at similar
- Page 93 and 94: 77 Table 2.17 State usage of progra
- Page 95 and 96: 79 2.3.1 Stretton (1982, 1984) 53 S
30<br />
2.1 Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>Australian</strong> wage subsidy evaluation evidence<br />
The brief overseas review in <strong>the</strong> first chapter showed relatively few evaluations <strong>of</strong> wage<br />
subsidies exist, and empirical evidence for wage subsidies is not well founded. As this<br />
section will show, wage subsidy programs in Australia also have little publicly available<br />
evaluation evidence. Microeconomic evaluation is selected, using individual data,<br />
addressing <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> subsidy leads to better employment experience for<br />
participants after <strong>the</strong> program ends. The evidence is limited to published items that can be<br />
accessed by <strong>the</strong> public.<br />
Only recent evidence is compiled, corresponding approximately to <strong>the</strong> period starting<br />
with <strong>the</strong> 1980’s and onward, since this is <strong>the</strong> period <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> later analysis. However it<br />
becomes evident in reviewing <strong>the</strong> literature that in fact most programs only started within<br />
<strong>the</strong> 1970’s, and publicly available evaluation work occurred mostly in <strong>the</strong> mid-1980’s<br />
and l990’s. Paterson (1982) in discussing evaluation activities in Australia pointed out<br />
that “…In Australia government involvement in <strong>the</strong> area <strong>of</strong> manpower programs is a<br />
relatively new phenomenon. Experience with manpower program evaluation is <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
limited.” (Paterson (1982): 1). The timing <strong>of</strong> this statement marked <strong>the</strong> general beginning<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Australian</strong> evaluation activities and publications.<br />
<strong>Wage</strong> subsidies form only a part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> array <strong>of</strong> labour market programs available, and so<br />
evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se in turn forms only a small part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> existing <strong>Australian</strong> evaluation<br />
literature available. <strong>Evaluation</strong> evidence for o<strong>the</strong>r program types such as training for<br />
Australia can be found generally reviewed in Webster (1998, 1997a).<br />
Although subsidised apprenticeships were available, for example CRAFT<br />
(Commonwealth Rebate for Apprenticeship Full-time Training), <strong>the</strong>se are not dealt with<br />
as <strong>the</strong>y are deemed to be mostly a training subsidy. 4 Also not covered are programs with<br />
4 In support <strong>of</strong> this, in references such as Kesteven (1987) and Hoy (1983) <strong>the</strong>y are categorized as<br />
education programs. The design did allow for a small amount <strong>of</strong> on-<strong>the</strong>-job training. For example Merrilees<br />
(1984) refers to wage subsidies in CRAFT for this reason, however <strong>the</strong> grand focus was apprenticeship<br />
training.