Iacono, Robe o
A icle
Minimum income schemes in Eu ope: Is he e a ade-o
wi h ac i a ion policies?
IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
IZA – Ins i u e o Labo Economics
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Iacono, Robe o (2017) : Minimum income schemes in Eu ope: Is he e a ade-
o wi h ac i a ion policies?, IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies, ISSN 2193-9012, Sp inge ,
Heidelbe g, Vol. 6, Iss. 1, pp. 1-15,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1186/s40174-016-0073-2
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/195018
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Open Access
Minimum income schemes in Eu ope:
is he e a ade-o wi h ac i a ion policies?
Robe o Iacono
Co espondence:
[email p o ec ed]
Depa men o Applied Social
Science, No wegian Uni e si y o
Science and Technology (NTNU),
7491 T ondheim, No way
Abs ac
This pape makes wo con ibu ions o he li e a u e. Fi s , by employing a mac o-
le el ins i u ional da ase on bene i le els o social assis ance (SA) and minimum
income p o ec ion (MIP) in 22 Eu opean coun ies in he pe iod 1990–2013, I show
ha he adequacy o income suppo o low-income inac i e indi iduals in
Eu opean wel a e s a es has been s eadily dec easing since 1994. Second, he pape
e isi s empi ically he hypo hesis o a ade-o be ween he adequacy o ou -o -
wo k bene i s and he public expendi u e on ac i e labo ma ke policies (ALMPs).
The empi ical esul s o he ixed e ec s model show ha he ade-o does no
appea o be signi ican in any o he es ed speci ica ions. The esul s a e obus o
he in oduc ion o a se o con en ional con ols ela ed o he labo ma ke .
JEL Classi ica ion: H53, H55, I38.
Keywo ds: Social assis ance, Minimum income p o ec ion, Ac i e labo ma ke
policies, Eu opean wel a e s a es
1 In oduc ion
This pape add esses he ela ionship be ween he adequacy o minimum sa e y-ne s
and he inc eased ocus on ac i a ion s a egies in labo ma ke policies in Eu opean
wel a e s a es. To which ex en can he e ec i eness o ac i a ion policies go hand in
hand wi h o e ing adequa e le els o minimum income p o ec ion (MIP, he ea e )
and social assis ance (SA, he ea e )? On he one hand, do minimum income schemes
ha e o be in eg a ed in he o e all ac i a ion amewo k and hence educed in magni-
ude in o de no o dis o wo k incen i es? On he o he hand, how o achie e ha
balance whils ensu ing ha minimum income schemes do no end up c ea ing po e y
aps? These b oad ques ions lie behind he empi ical analysis o he cu en pape ,
which aims a es ing wo opposi e wo king hypo heses on he issue. I has o be
poin ed ou ha , ins ead o aking a no ma i e s and on he balance be ween ac i a ion
and ou -o -wo k bene i s, he cu en s udy aims a showing wha has been he ac ual
p ac ice in Eu opean wel a e s a es om 1990 o 2013.
Imme oll (2012) has analyzed he policy design and e ec i eness o minimum in-
come bene i s in OECD coun ies. Nelson (2013) has explo ed he ques ion o o
which ex en social assis ance in Eu opean wel a e s a es p o ides p o ec ion agains
low income. On he o he hand, a me a-analysis o he li e a u e on ac i a ion s a -
egies implemen ed in labo ma ke s o OECD coun ies has been p o ided by Ca d e
al. (2010). The in e ac ion be ween ac i a ion and income suppo has been
IZA Jou nal o Eu opean
Labo S udie
s
© The Au ho (s). 2017 Open Access This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional
License (h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium,
p o ided you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce, p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons license, and
indica e i changes we e made.
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1
DOI 10.1186/s40174-016-0073-2
in es iga ed by Imme oll and Sca pe a (2012), ad oca ing o an e ec i e policy mix
based on he igh balance be ween ac i a ion, income suppo , and wo k incen i es. In
he economic li e a u e, Besley and Coa e (1992) ha e analyzed his issue by explo ing
he incen i e case o wo k a e. Thei conclusion is ha , o he e o be a de e en a -
gumen o wo k a e (i.e., o he bene i s o a educed numbe o poo exceeding he
induced o al cos s o wo k a e), he go e nmen will ha e o impose signi ican ly mo e
han a small wo k equi emen . Molande and To s ik (2015) in es iga e and analyze
om a no ma i e poin o iew he main a gumen s jus i ying implemen a ion o
manda o y ac i a ion o bene i ecipien s. The ou a gumen s highligh ed and com-
pa a i ely e alua ed a e e iciency, sus ainabili y, pa e nalism, and jus ice. All hese im-
po an con ibu ions in he economic and social policy li e a u e p o ided he g ound
o he de elopmen o he esea ch ques ion o his pape , which is in oduced as
ollows.
A concep ual amewo k is ou lined in he nex sec ion in o de o ame he
wo wo king hypo heses which a e subsequen ly es ed in he empi ical analysis.
The amewo k is cons i u ed by he “disincen i e” iew p esc ibing low ou -o -
wo k bene i s pa allel o a high expendi u e on ac i e labo ma ke policies
(ALMPs, he ea e ) and by he “gene osi y” iew, which would ins ead complemen
he high expendi u e on ALMPs wi h highe bene i le els. Hence, he main e-
sea ch ques ion a ises as such: which o hese wo “ iews”o wo king hypo heses
a esuppo edby heda aonminimumincomeschemesandexpendi u eonac i-
a ion o Eu opean wel a e s a es?
The main con ibu ions o he pape a e summa ized as ollows. Fi s ly, by employing
he da ase on bene i le els o SA and minimum income p o ec ion (MIP) in 22
Eu opean coun ies in he pe iod 1990–2013, he desc ip i e empi ical analysis indi-
ca es a ma ked educ ion as ega ds he adequacy o income suppo o inac i e low-
income indi iduals in Eu opean wel a e s a es since 1994. This s ylized ac , seemingly
p o iding ini ial suppo o he “disincen i e” iew, cons i u es he g ound o he p o-
ceeding o he analysis on he in e ac ion o p o ision o ou -o -wo k bene i s wi h ac i-
a ion. Second, he pape es s empi ically he null hypo hesis o he p esence o a
ade-o be ween he adequacy o bene i le els and he agg ega e expendi u e on
ALMPs. The empi ical analysis posi s di e en speci ica ions o he ixed e ec s model,
in o de o gua an ee obus ness o he esul s. The esul s indica e ha he ade-o
does no appea o be signi ican , in any o he es ed speci ica ions. Whene e signi i-
can , he sign o he coe icien indica ing a co a ia ion be ween ou -o -wo k bene i s
and expendi u e on ac i a ion is sligh ly posi i e. In o he wo ds, he “gene osi y” iew
seems o ecei e suppo om he da a, indica ing ha i is he o e all expendi u e and
deg ee o gene osi y o he wel a e s a es ha ma e s. A gene ous wel a e s a e will
p o ide bo h high ou -o -wo k bene i s and high expendi u e on ac i a ion, whils a less
gene ous one will cu on he bene i s wi hou in es ing in ac i a ion. These esul s a e
p o en obus o he in oduc ion o a se o con en ional con ols ela ed o he labo
ma ke .
The pape p oceeds as ollows. In Sec ion 2, he concep ual amewo k is ou lined.
The da a and he s ylized ac s a e p esen ed in Sec ion 3, whils Sec ion 4 desc ibes
he empi ical analysis. Sec ion 5 p esen s he esul s, whils Sec ion 6 discusses hem in
ligh o he concep ual amewo k. Sec ion 7 concludes.
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 2 o 15
2 Concep ual amewo k
This sec ion aims a p esen ing he concep ual amewo k which will be empi ically
es ed in he es o he a icle. The ac ual ela ionship be ween social assis ance and
minimum income p o ec ion, in gene al de ined as minimum income schemes (MISs,
he ea e ) o ou -o -wo k bene i s, and ac i a ion policies is pinned down by go e n-
men au ho i ies, mainly based on wo coun e ac ing conside a ions.
[1]On one side, he “disincen i e” iew p esc ibes ha bene i s mus be kep low
no o dis o wo k incen i es, so ha inac i e low-income indi iduals would
ake pa in ac i a ion p og ams a he han elying on passi e bene i s. Hence,
assuming ha he au ho i ies ake in o accoun his ade-o o a ep esen a i e
(a e age) bene i ecei e , we should as a esul obse e a ade-o be ween
bene i s and ac i a ion a he mac o-ins i u ional le el as well. F aze and Ma lie
(2009) in hei o e iew abou he adequacy o MISs ac oss EU membe s a es
include a de ailed lis o he speci ic disincen i es o ake up wo k o inac i e
indi iduals. The s ylized ac o inc eased obliga ions o wel a e ecipien s a he
Eu opean le el, join ly wi h he e osion o ou -o -wo k bene i le els, has been
highligh ed as he po en ial ealiza ion o a ade-o be ween ac i a ion and
bene i s in Nelson (2013) o he pe iod 1990–2007 in 19 Eu opean coun ies.
The cu en pape aims a es ing his hypo hesis o ade-o agains he ollowing
al e na i e hypo hesis.
[2]On he o he hand, Eu opean coun ies in he las decades aimed a combining a
s a egy o po e y educ ion o indi iduals who a e no wo king, join ly wi h
p omo ion o e u n o employmen (OECD, 2005). This join s a egy, which I
label as he “gene osi y” iew, would co espond o a policy o main aining (o e en
inc easing) he cu en le els o adequacy o income suppo whils inc easing
expendi u e on ALMPs. This iew is backed-up by F aze and Ma lie (2009), who
p o ide a lis o policy-o ien ed sugges ions o EU membe s a es, and p ecisely
add ess he s a egy o a oid disincen i e e ec s whils a he same ime ensu ing
adequacy o MISs.
Which o hese wo wo king hypo heses ha e p e ailed in he ac ual policy making o
he Eu opean coun ies’au ho i ies in he yea s 1990–2013? In o de o gi e a en a i e
answe o his empi ical ques ion, I u n o he da a in he nex sec ion.
3 Da a and s ylized ac s
A i s , he s udy aims a p esen ing some s ylized ac s ela ed o social assis ance
(SA) and minimum income p o ec ion (MIP) bene i s in Eu ope. The da ase u ilized in
his wo k is he social assis ance and minimum income p o ec ion (SAMIP) da ase ,
which includes de ailed compa able in o ma ion on he bene i le els o indi iduals e-
cei ing income suppo in a la ge numbe o Eu opean coun ies, o he yea s 1990–
2013. The ull SAMIP da ase con ains bene i le els o h ee ypical households: a
single pe son, a lone pa en , and a wo pa en amily. Howe e , his s udy ocuses ex-
clusi ely on he single pe son case, whils he wo o he households a e excluded due
o missing da a ( o he ull pe iod 1990–2013) on mean equi alized income necessa y
o compu e he abo emen ioned adequacy measu es.
1
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 3 o 15
The SA a es om he SAMIP da ase employed in his s udy a e denomina ed in
local cu ency, o a single adul pe son below e i emen age and wi hou child en, ex-
cluding o ins ance housing cos s and o he bene i s. The MIP le els build on he SA
a es, by including housing cos s and o he bene i s. The SA and MIP bene i le els o
a o al o 22 Eu opean coun ies (Aus ia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denma k, Es onia,
Finland, F ance, Ge many, Hunga y, I eland, I aly, Luxembou g, Ne he lands, No way,
Poland, Po ugal, Slo akia, Slo enia, Spain, Sweden, Swi ze land, Uni ed Kingdom) a e
hen s anda dized by ei he GDP pe capi a o by a e age annual wages,
2
p o iding an
in e na ionally compa able p oxy o he adequacy o ela i e “gene osi y”o ou -o -
wo k bene i s in a gi en coun y. The main a iables in he da ase used o he empi -
ical analysis o his wo k a e summa ized in Table 1.
The s ylized ac s abou he se ies on adequacy o SA and MIP a e p esen ed below.
Figu e 1 shows an o e all dec easing endency o he median adequacy o social assis -
ance in Eu opean coun ies. The u n om a sligh upwa d endency o a dec easing
one akes place a ound yea 1994, om which SA adequacy ine i ably declines un il
yea 2005, emaining s able om hen onwa ds.
As shown in Fig. 2, a ia ion ac oss coun ies appea s o be wide o he adequacy o
MIP as compa ed o ha o SA. In addi ion, we obse e a endency owa ds a lowe
a e age and median le el o bo h schemes in 2013 as compa ed o 1990. In o he
wo ds, Figs. 1 and 2 indica e ha bo h SA and MIP adequacies ha e been educed a
he o e all Eu opean le el. The hypo hesis ha his esul has been endogenously
d i en by con empo aneous g ow h in GDP pe capi a is ele an o he coun ies
aken indi idually, bu becomes less plausible a he c oss-coun y le el.
Ano he s ylized ac is p o ided by simply ocusing on he 1990–2013 se ies o he
sample a iance o SA adequacy o he 22 Eu opean coun ies included in he analysis.
Figu e 3 plo s his ime se ies, compu ed by using yea ly SA a es.
As shown in Fig. 3, a e an ini ial pe iod 1990–2000 wi h signi ican jumps in he
a iance o SA adequacy, he pe iod om 2000 onwa ds p esen s an app oxima ely
cons an le el among Eu opean coun ies (a se o s anda d uni - oo es s ha e been
conduc ed as well, ejec ing he uni - oo null hypo hesis a he 95% con idence le el).
This e idence applies o bo h measu es o adequacy, independen ly o whe he he de-
nomina o is gi en by GDP pe capi a o a e age annual wages. A ho ough empi ical
analysis o he issue o con e gence o di e gence as ega ds he pa h o SA adequacy
Table 1 Summa y s a is ics o he main a iables in he da ase
Obs. Mean S d. de . Min Max
SA/GDP pe capi a 490 0.1905 0.0657 0.0535 0.4344
SA/a g. annual wages 482 0.1797 0.0540 0.0611 0.3414
MIP/GDP pe capi a 489 0.2707 0.0899 0.1036 0.5054
MIP/a g. annual wages 482 0.2572 0.0832 0.1066 0.5364
ALMP (as % o GDP) 467 2.0488 1.249 0.15 7.07
T ade union densi y 508 35.898 20.511 5.6543 83.862
To al employmen index 377 94.732 11.823 52.206 146.27
Unemploymen (% o labo o ce) 516 8.0393 4.2666 0.4689 26.187
No e. Da a sou ces. (1) OECD.S a (2016) o : GDP pe capi a a cu en p ices; a e age annual wages; ALMP as % o GDP;
ade union densi y; o al employmen index; unemploymen as % o labo o ce. (2) SAMIP (2016) da ase o : SA a es;
MIP a es
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 4 o 15

among Eu opean coun ies lies ou side he scope o his pape . Howe e , i has o be
poin ed ou ha Nelson (2008) analyzed ends and le els o minimum income p o ec-
ion in Eu ope o he pe iod 1990–2005 and his esul s poin in he di ec ion o a con-
e ging pa h.
How does he p e ious li e a u e explain he dec easing le el o adequacy o SA and
MIP om a ound 1994 onwa ds? Ma chal e al. (2016) ha e highligh ed he ole o aus-
e i y in o de o ob ain a causal explana ion o his e enchmen in he gene osi y de-
g ee o SA and MIP since he 1990s. The cu en s udy, a he han e isi ing he
analysis o he undamen al de e minan s o ou -o -wo k bene i le els, aims ins ead a
explo ing he ela ionship be ween adequacy o bene i s and ac i a ion policies a he
c oss-coun y le el, as explained in he concep ual amewo k o he p e ious sec ion.
Le us u n now o he s ylized ac s on ac i a ion policies, p ima ily aimed a b ing-
ing indi iduals back o employmen . Due o high he e ogenei y ac oss coun ies in he
app oaches o ac i a ion as documen ed by Escude o (2015) and o he speci ic e-
sea ch ques ion unde analysis, his wo k ocuses on he agg ega e alue gi en by coun-
ies’public expendi u e on ALMPs as a pe cen age o GDP. Ma in John (2014) has
0.1 .2 .3 .4
Social Assis ance adequacy, yea ly
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Yea
Fig. 1 Social Assis ance adequacy, 1990–2013. No e: social assis ance (SA) yea ly a es s anda dized by GDP
pe capi a o 22 Eu opean coun ies in he yea s 1990–2013
.1 .2 .3 .4 .5
MIP adequacy, yea ly
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Yea
Fig. 2 Minimum income p o ec ion adequacy, 1990–2013. No e: minimum income p o ec ion (MIP) yea ly
a es s anda dized by GDP pe capi a o 22 Eu opean coun ies in he yea s 1990–2013
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 5 o 15
ex ensi ely documen ed he e idence o an inc ease in public expendi u e ela ed o ac-
i e labo ma ke policies (ALMPs) in Eu opean coun ies in he las decades, also in
ela ion o hei e ec i eness. The abo e e idence (Figs. 1 and 2) o dec easing SA and
MIP adequacy combined wi h a sus ained public expendi u e in ALMPs pins down he
esea ch ques ion o his pape , which aims a in es iga ing he alidi y o he abo e-
men ioned wo king hypo heses based on he “disincen i e”o “gene osi y” iews. Le
us obse e in Fig. 4 he join sca e plo o bo h SA and MIP adequacy and he
ac ion o GDP spen on ALMPs.
Figu e 4 poin s o a somewha posi i e ela ionship be ween bo h SA ( ed) and MIP
(blue) adequacy and he ac ion o GDP dedica ed o ALMPs. The in es iga ion o he
ac ual ela ionship be ween hese a iables will be he main ask o he ollowing sec-
ions whe e he empi ical analysis is conduc ed.
4 Empi ical s a egy
The ela ionships I es ima ed a e ep esen ed by he ollowing pai o log-log al e na i e
speci ica ions:
SAj; ¼ajþβ þγALMPj; þθ0
j; φþ∈j; ;ð1Þ
.002 .003 .004 .005 .006 .007
Va iance SA / GDP p.c.
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Yea
Fig. 3 Sample a iance o Social assis ance adequacy, 1990–2013
0.1 .2 .3 .4 .5
0 2 4 6 8
ALMP % o GDP (OECD)
MIP adequacy SA adequacy
Fig. 4 SA and MIP adequacy and ALMPs, 1990–2013
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 6 o 15
MIPj; ¼δjþπ þτALMPj; þμ0
j; ρþ∈j; ;ð2Þ
in which SA
j,
in (1) and MIP
j,
in (2) a e espec i ely he log o SA and MIP adequacy
a iables o coun y j, s anda dized ei he by GDP pe capi a o by a e age annual
wages;
3
a
j
and δ
j
a e dummy a iables es ima ing coun y ixed e ec s; β
and π
es ima e
ime ixed e ec s; ALMP
j,
ep esen s he log o he ac ion o GDP in es ed in ac i e
labo ma ke policies o coun y j; θ’
j,
and μ’
j,
include a se o con en ional co a ia es e-
la ed o labo ma ke ins i u ions ( ade union densi y, o al employmen , unemploymen
as a % o he labo o ce); and ∈
j,
a e e o e ms adjus ed o coun y clus e ing.
As ega ds he choice o he speci ic con ol a iables, ade union densi y (TUD,
he ea e ) has been included based on he ollowing logic. Assume o ins ance ha he
esul s indica e a ade-o be ween ou -o -wo k bene i s and ALMPs so o con i m he
“disincen i e” iew. The expec ed posi i e e ec o highe TUD on he wages o he
low-skilled labo o ce would po en ially make ou -o -wo k bene i s ela i ely less ap-
pealing o hese wo ke s, hence con ibu ing o mi iga e he signi icance and obus -
ness o he ade-o wi h ac i a ion policies.
Fo each o he wo adequacy measu es, models (1) and (2) we e es ima ed a i s by
pooled OLS wi h s anda d e o s clus e ed by coun ies. Subsequen ly, he dummy a -
iables es ima ing coun y and ime ixed e ec s we e in oduced. A las , in o de o
ake in o accoun as well o he hypo hesis o au oco ela ion in he idiosync a ic e o
e ms, (1) and (2) we e es ima ed in he p esence o AR (1) dis u bance.
A ema k abou endogenei y issues has o be done he e. Gi en he speci ica ions o
(1) and (2) and he policy a iables a hand, he isk o endogenei y does no allow o
exclude he p esence o e e se causali y a his s age. Howe e , his does no need o
ully in alida e he esea ch ques ion o he cu en s udy. On one side, esul s indica -
ing weak signi icance o he e ec o ALMPs on SA/MIP would o ins ance gi e e i-
dence in he di ec ion o dis ega ding he “disincen i e” iew men ioned abo e, since
ha hypo hesis equi es a s ongly signi ican in e se ela ionship o be con i med. On
he o he hand, in case o posi i e and signi ican ela ionship be ween SA/MIP ad-
equacy and ALMPs, he e idence would lead o a p e e ence o he “gene osi y” iew,
ega dless o he unde lying di ec ion o causali y. In o he wo ds, he aim o he
cu en explo a o y s udy is o open he ield o u u e esea ch on his speci ic ela-
ionship, which should also be suppo ed by analyses a he wi hin-coun y le el o
which a mo e powe ul iden i ica ion s a egy and a highe le el o de ail can be ob-
ained. The esul s o he di e en es ima ions a e p esen ed in he nex sec ion.
5 Econome ic esul s
Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 below epo he e ec s o he expendi u e o ALMPs on he SA
and MIP adequacy a iables as speci ied by (1) and (2) and es ima ed by pooled OLS
wi h clus e ed s anda d e o s, o each o he wo s anda diza ions (ei he GDP pe
capi a in Tables 2 and 3 o a e age annual wages in Tables 4 and 5).
The OLS coe icien s in Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 a e elas ici ies; hence, hey show he ex-
pec ed pe cen age change o SA/MIP adequacy when he ac ion o GDP de o ed o
ALMPs inc eases by 1%. A i s look a hese in oduc o y esul s indica e ha ALMPs
ha e a posi i e and signi ican e ec on bo h SA and MIP adequacy, wi h he la e be-
ing s ongly signi ican when all con ols a e included as well. The magni ude o he
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 7 o 15
e ec does no o e come he 0.3% o he ini ial adequacy a es (in o he wo ds, an elas-
ici y o 0.3). As p edic ed in he p e ious sec ion, he in oduc ion o TUD as a con ol
has he e ec o educing he impac o ALMPs on adequacy a es, indica ing ha he
ela ionship becomes milde wi h highe wages o he low-skilled indi iduals.
These esul s migh be biased by ime-in a ian and coun y-speci ic ac o s simul-
aneously a ec ing he dependen a iable and he eg esso s. Hence, we mo e o he
ixed e ec s (FE, he ea e ) model speci ica ion which con ols o all he ac oss-
coun y ac ion, in o de o exploi he wi hin-coun y a ia ion o e ime.
Tables 6, 7, 8, and 9 below epo now he e ec s o he expendi u e o ALMPs on
he SA/MIP adequacy a iables as es ima ed by he FE model, o each o he wo s an-
da diza ions (ei he GDP pe capi a in Tables 6 and 7 o a e age annual wages in
Tables 8 and 9).
The FE esul s o he abo e Tables 6, 7, 8, and 9 indica e ha , mos ly o he case o
he SA adequacy (unde bo h he possible s anda diza ions), he signi icance o he
pooled OLS coe icien s was due o some unobse able ime-in a ian and coun y spe-
ci ic a iable, which has been now aken away by he FE dummies. When i comes o
he MIP adequacy, he e ec s o ALMPs a e sligh ly less signi ican , howe e mos ly o
he same magni ude as in he simple pooled OLS models. No ice ha , un il now, none
Table 2 Log-log model es ima ed by pooled OLS wi h clus e ed s anda d e o s
(1) (2) (3) (4)
SAGDP SAGDP SAGDP SAGDP
ALMP (% o GDP) 0.253
***
0.207
***
0.149
**
0.0915
(0.0687) (0.0545) (0.0560) (0.102)
T ade union densi y 0.393
***
0.348
*
0.360
*
(0.0977) (0.142) (0.147)
To al employmen −0.399 −0.384
(0.236) (0.227)
Unemploymen (% o LF) 0.0778
(0.0946)
Obs. 445 440 318 318
Clus e ed s anda d e o s in pa en heses,
*
p< 0.05,
**
p< 0.01,
***
p< 0.001
Table 3 Log-log model es ima ed by pooled OLS wi h clus e ed s anda d e o s
(1) (2) (3) (4)
MIPGDP MIPGDP MIPGDP MIPGDP
ALMP (% o GDP) 0.294
***
0.262
***
0.239
***
0.189
***
(0.0548) (0.0436) (0.0393) (0.0405)
T ade union densi y 0.237
**
0.216
*
0.223
**
(0.0786) (0.0843) (0.0839)
To al employmen −0.402 −0.392
(0.217) (0.202)
Unemploymen (% o LF) 0.0671
(0.0565)
Obs. 445 440 318 318
Clus e ed s anda d e o s in pa en heses,
*
p< 0.05,
**
p< 0.01,
***
p< 0.001
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 8 o 15
Nelson K (2008) Minimum income p o ec ion and Eu opean in eg a ion: ends and le els o minimum bene i s in
compa a i e pe spec i e, 1990-2005. In J Heal h Se 38(1):103–124
Nelson K (2013) Social assis ance and EU po e y h esholds 1990-2008. A e Eu opean wel a e sys ems p o iding jus
and ai p o ec ion agains low income? Eu Sociol Re 29(2):386–401. doi:10.1093/es /jc 080e
OECD (2005) Inc easing inancial incen i es o wo k: he ole o in-wo k bene i s. OECD Employmen Ou look. Pa is.
h ps://www.oecd.o g/els/emp/36780865.pd . Accessed 20 Sep 2016
OECD.S a (2016) h p://s a s.oecd.o g/. Accessed 24 Sep 2016
SAMIP (2016) h p://www.so i.su.se/spin/. Accessed 20 Sep 2016
Submi you manusc ip o a
jou nal and benefi om:
7 Con enien online submission
7 Rigo ous pee e iew
7 Immedia e publica ion on accep ance
7 Open access: a icles eely a ailable online
7 High isibili y wi hin he fi eld
7 Re aining he copy igh o you a icle
Submi you nex manusc ip a 7 sp inge open.com
Iacono IZA Jou nal o Eu opean Labo S udies (2017) 6:1 Page 15 o 15