Journal of Population Economics

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 683–703 | Cite as

Displacement and household adaptation: insured by the spouse or the state?

  • Inés Hardoy
  • Pål SchøneEmail author
Original Paper


We investigate the added worker effect in a setting where female labour supply is high and the welfare state is generous. We trace couples’ labour supply and income development following the husband’s job displacement. We find no support for the added worker effect for the full sample of households. However, the added worker effect seems to be at work for subsamples characterised by households where the spouses are not working in the same industry and where the wife did not work full time pre-displacement. When using a measure of total household income, which includes public transfers, we find that the negative income impact of displacement is reduced by approximately 60 to 70 % when we also adjust for lower tax payments. Results suggest that income loss due to displacement is mitigated more by social welfare payments than by labour supply responses of the spouse.


Labour supply Added worker effect Displacement Welfare benefits 

JEL Classification

J15 J63 J65 



The Norwegian Research Council projects ‘Public Policy and the Labour Market Attachment of Different Households’ and ‘Trygd i kontekst. Rettferdighet, effektivitet, fordeling’ financed this study. The authors gratefully acknowledge this financial support.


  1. Couch KA, Placzek DW (2010) Earnings losses of displaced workers revisited. Am Econ Rev 100:572–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Eliason M, Storrie D (2006) Lasting or latent scars? Swedish evidence on the long-term effects of job displacement. J Labor Econ 24:831–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eliasson M (2012) Lost jobs, broken marriages. J Popul Econ 25:1365–1397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Heckman J, Robb R (1985) Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions. In: Heckman J, Singer B (eds) Longitudinal analyses of the labour market data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 156–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Huttunen K, Møen J, Salvanes KG (2011) How destructive is creative destruction? Effects of job loss on mobility, withdrawal and income. J Eur Econ Ass 9:840–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jacobson LS, LaLonde R, Sullivan D (1993) Earnings losses of displaced workers. Am Econ Rev 83:685–709Google Scholar
  7. Juhn C, Potter S (2007) Is there still an added worker effect? Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff report No. 310Google Scholar
  8. Lalonde R (1986) Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data. Am Econ Rev 76:604–620Google Scholar
  9. Lundberg S (1985) The added worker effect. J Lab Econ 3(1):11–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Malony T (1987) Employment constraints and labour supply of married women. A re-examining of the added worker effect. J Hum Resour 22:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. OECD (2011) Employment Outlook. OECD ParisGoogle Scholar
  12. Rege M, Telle K, Votruba M (2007) Plant closure and marital dissolution. Research Department, Statistics Norway, discussion paper 514Google Scholar
  13. Ruhm CJ (1991) Are workers permanently scarred by job displacement?Am Econ Rev 81:319–324Google Scholar
  14. Røed K, Fevang E (2007) Organizational change, absenteeism, and welfare dependency. J Hum Resour 42:156–193Google Scholar
  15. Spletzer JR (1997) Reexamining the added worker effect. Econ Inq 35:417–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stephens M (2002) Worker displacement and the added worker effect. J Labor Econ 20:504–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stevens AH (1997) Persistent effects of job displacement: The importance of multiple job losses. J Labor Econ 1(5):165–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Social ResearchOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations