Active labour market policies: introduction.
Riley, Rebecca
Over the past decade active labour market policy has been an
integral part of the Labour Government's strategy for achieving
employment opportunity for all, encompassing Welfare-to-Work programmes
such as the various New Deals for the unemployed and the more recently
introduced Pathways to Work for people with a disability. Two of the
hallmarks of policy development have been the increasing importance of
the concept of 'mutual obligation' or individuals'
'rights and responsibilities' in the delivery and design of
active labour market policy and the extension of the target group for
these measures, traditionally the unemployed, to include also the
economically inactive.
The change in focus on rights and responsibilities, i.e. the
'carrot and stick' design of active labour market policy, was
perhaps most noticeable with the introduction of the New Deal for Young
People shortly after the Labour Government came to power. Hereafter it
was no longer possible for young people to claim unemployment benefit
for long periods of time without participating in or taking up the offer
of help provided by the job search assistance, training, subsidised employment and work placements available through the New Deal for Young
People. Failure to participate led to benefit sanctions. With the
introduction and subsequent re-engineering of the New Deal 25+, this
design feature of benefit delivery and active labour market programmes
was later extended to adults who had been claiming unemployment benefit
for more than eighteen months.
Active labour market programmes intended to improve
individuals' employability were also made available to lone parents
and individuals claiming disability related benefits. For these groups
participation in programmes is generally not a condition of benefit
receipt. However, with the introduction of mandatory work-focused
interviews first for lone parents claiming Income Support and
subsequently for individuals claiming Incapacity Benefit, the concept of
mutual obligation has also been introduced for claimants of these and
other social security benefits. This is also evidenced by the linking of
agencies responsible for benefit delivery and the employment service
into one with the national roll-out of Jobcentre Plus.
This issue of the Review provides four articles on active labour
market policy reflecting some of the main policy developments over the
past decade. The first article, by Jan van Ours, reviews the evidence on
the role of compulsion in the design of active labour market programmes.
As a starting point he sets out a simple theoretical model within which
to analyse the effects on the labour market of compulsion in programmes.
In this framework active labour market programmes enhance the
employability or job search effectiveness of the unemployed, but they
also reduce the utility to the individual of claiming unemployment
benefit. Both effects increase the exit rate from unemployment, but the
reduction in the utility of being unemployed that arises through
mandatory participation in programmes also reduces the quality of jobs
that individuals find. Reviewing the empirical evidence on the incentive
effects potentially associated with compulsion in active labour market
programmes the author concludes that, without further evidence on why
some programmes are more effective at reducing unemployment than others,
all active labour market programmes should include an element of
compulsion.
In the second article Richard Dorsett summarises recent empirical
research on the labour market impacts of Pathways to Work, the
Government's latest initiative intended to increase employment
amongst people claiming disability related benefits. With this package
of reforms, many Incapacity Benefit claimants are obliged to participate
in a series of work-focused interviews as a condition of receiving
benefits. This evidence suggests that the Pathways to Work package of
reforms has made some headway in increasing the exit rate from
Incapacity Benefit to employment. The exit rate from Incapacity Benefit
more generally has been less affected. The author concludes that the
policy may help the Government to achieve its aim of increasing the
employment rate amongst all people of working age. It is less likely to
lead to significant reductions in the numbers of people claiming
Incapacity Benefit. Examining the impact of Pathways to Work on
different sub-groups of Incapacity Benefit claimants, the study suggests
that the reforms have been most effective in changing the fortunes of
female claimants, of those less than 50 years of age, and of those with
dependent children. The package of reforms does not appear to have been
successful in changing labour market outcomes for the largest group of
Incapacity Benefit claimants, those with mental health problems.
Perhaps this latter finding illustrates the limits in scope of
active labour market policy, despite the attempt to tailor the help
provided to suit the individual. Richard Layard and his colleagues
examine the impacts of psychological therapy on employment and on the
economy. They evaluate the potential costs and benefits of wider
provision of cognitive behavioural therapy, a treatment for depression
and anxiety disorders that has proved to be at least as effective as
drugs. They suggest that the positive effects on employment from
improved health would be associated with significant savings to the
Exchequer in the form of reduced Incapacity Benefit claims and higher
tax receipts. Society at large would benefit from the output generated
through the additional employment, but the largest benefits to society
would accrue through the resulting reduction in suffering measured by
the value of the increase in quality adjusted life years.
Finally, mandatory participation in active labour market programmes
and the extension of active labour market policy to people traditionally
regarded as outside the labour market are not distinct features of
policy development in the UK alone. Indeed, these features are
stipulated in the European Union's guidelines for employment
policies for its Member States, supporting the Lisbon Strategy. In the
last article in this issue of the Review, Jon Kvist and Lisbeth Pedersen
review recent active labour market policy in the context of the Danish
flexicurity model, where activation policies are accompanied by generous
social security protection and relatively lax employment protection.
Since 1994, active labour market policy there has increasingly been
designed around the concept of mutual obligation between individuals and
society, which has been extended to virtually all claimants of social
assistance in an effort to increase labour supply and promote social
integration. It is often believed that these changes in labour market
policy have contributed to the currently favourable employment situation
in Denmark. Interestingly, the authors conclude that the empirical
evidence to support this belief is relatively scant.