Empirical Economics

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 65–84 | Cite as

Evaluating active labor market programs in Romania

  • Núria Rodríguez-PlanasEmail author
  • Benus Jacob
Original Paper


Using unusually rich (for transition economies) follow-up survey data and propensity score matching techniques, this paper seeks to increase our knowledge on what active labor market programs (ALMPs) work in South-East European countries by providing estimates of the effects of four ALMPs implemented in Romania in the late 1990 s. We find that three programs (training and retraining, self-employment assistance, and public employment and relocation services) had success in improving participants’ economic outcomes. In contrast, public employment was found detrimental for the employment prospects of its participants. Our sensitivity analysis also finds evidence that, in the case of training and retraining, self-employment assistance, and public employment and relocation services, operators “cream off” the most qualified candidates among the unemployed; whereas public employment seems to be used as a regional policy by “bringing work to the workers”, that is, creating jobs in high unemployment regions.


Active labor market programs Propensity score matching Transition economies Pre-program employment information 

JEL Classification

J21 J31 J64 J65 J68 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

181_2009_256_MOESM1_ESM.doc (152 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 152 kb)


  1. Abadie A, Imbens G. (2006) On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators. Working Paper. Harvard University, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Bechterman G, Olivar K, Dar A (2004) Impact of Active Labor Market Programs: New Evidence from Evaluations with Particular Attention to Developing and Transition Countries. Social Protection Discussion Paper Series 0402Google Scholar
  3. Bender S, Bergemann A, Fitzenberger B, Lechner M, Miquel R, Speckesser S, Wunsch C (2005) Uber dieWirksamkeit von Fortbildungs- und Umschulungsmaßnahmen. Beiträge zur Arbeitsmarkt-und Berufsforschung. IAB, NürnbergGoogle Scholar
  4. Bender S, Klose C (2000) Berufliche Weiterbildung für Arbeitslose – ein Weg zurück in die Beschäftigung? Analyse einer Abgängerkohorte des Jahres 1986 aus Maßnahmen der Fortbildung und Umschulung mit der ergänzten IAB–Beschäftigtenstichprobe 1975–1990. Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt– und Berufsforschung 33(3): 421–444Google Scholar
  5. Benus J, Rude J, Patrabansh S (2001) Impact of the Emergency Demobilization and Reintegration Project in Bosnia & Herzegovina. Abt AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  6. Boeri T, Burda M (1996) Active labor market programs, job matching, and the Czech miracle. Eur Econ Rev 40: 805–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burda M , Lubyova M (1995) The Impact of Active Labor Market Policies: a Closer Look at the Czech and Slovak Republics. Discussion Paper No. 1102, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown D, Earle J, Gimpelson V, Kapeliushnikov R, Lehmann H, Telegdy A, Vantu I, Visan R, Voicu A (2006) Nonstandard Forms and Measures of Employment and Unemployment in Transition: A Comparative Study of Estonia, Romania, and Russia. Budapest Working Papers on the Labour Market from Institute of Economics 602, Hungarian Academy of SciencesGoogle Scholar
  9. Dar A, Tzannatos Z (1999) Active Labor Market Programs: A Review of the Evidence from Evaluations. Social Protection Discussion Paper 9901. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Earle J, Pauna C (1996) Incidence and duration of unemployment in Romania. Eur Econ Rev 49: 829–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Earle J, Pauna C (1998) Long-term unemployment, social assistance and labor market policies in Romania. Empir Econ 23: 203–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fay R (1996) Enhancing the Effectiveness of Active Labor Market Policies: Evidence from Program Evaluations in OECD countries. Labor Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers 18, ParisGoogle Scholar
  13. Fitzenberger B, Speckesser S (2007) Employment effects of the provision of specific professional skills and techniques in Germany. Empir Econ 32: 529–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gill I, Dar A (1995) Cost and Effectiveness of Retraining in Hungary. Internal Discussion Paper IP-155, Europe and Central Asia Region, The World BankGoogle Scholar
  15. Heckman J, Ichimura H, Todd P (1997) Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training program. Rev Econ Stud 64: 605–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heckman J, Smith J (1999) The preprogram earnings dip and the determinants of participation in a social program: implications for simple program evaluation strategies. Econ J 108: 313–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heckman J, Smith J (2004) The determinants of participation in a social program: evidence from a prototypical job training program. J Labor Econ 22: 243–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Irac D, Minoiu C (2006) Risk Insurance in a Transition Economy: Evidence from Rural Romania. Department of Economics, University of ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  19. Imbens G (2004) Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Rev Econ Stat 86: 4–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jürges H (2005) Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear: unemployment, retrospective error, and life satisfaction. Schmollers Jahrb 125: 157–165Google Scholar
  21. Katz L (1994) Active labor market policies to expand employment and opportunity. In: Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue January, pp 239–322Google Scholar
  22. Kluve J (2006) The Effectiveness of European Active Labor Market Policy. IZA Discussion Paper 2018Google Scholar
  23. Kluve J, Lehmann H, Schmidt C (1999) Active Labor market policies in Poland: human capital enhancement, stigmatization, or benefit churning? J Comp Econ 27: 61–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kluve J, Lehmann H, Schmidt C (2008) Disentangling treatment effects of polish active labor market policies: the role of labor force status sequences. Labour Econ 15: 1270–1295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kupets O (2000) The impact of active labor market policies on the outflows from unemployment to regular jobs in Ukraine Thesis. Nation University. Kiev-Mohyla AcademyGoogle Scholar
  26. Lehmann H (1995) Active Labor Market Policies in the OECD and in Selected Transition Economies. Policy Research Working Paper 1502, World BankGoogle Scholar
  27. Lechner M, Miquel R, Wunsch C (2005a) Long-Run effects of public sector sponsored training in West Germany. IZA Discussion Paper 1443Google Scholar
  28. Lechner M, Miquel R, Wunsch C (2005b) The curse and blessing of training the unemployed in a changing economy: The case of East Germany after Unification. Discussion Paper, University of St. GallenGoogle Scholar
  29. Leetmaa R, Võrk A (2004) Evaluation of active labour market programmes in Estonia. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  30. Leuven E, Sianesi B (2003) Psmatch2: Stata module to perform Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. Available at
  31. Lubyova M, van Ours JC (1999) Effects of active labor market programs on the transition rate from unemployment into regular jobs in the Slovak Republic. J Comp Econ 27: 805–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin JP (1998) What Works among Active Labor Market Policies: Evidence form OECD Countries’ Experiences. Labor Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 35. ParisGoogle Scholar
  33. Martin J, Grubb D (2001) What Works and For Whom: A Review of OECD Countries’ Experiences with Active Labor Market Policies. Office of Labor Market Policy Evaluation. Working Paper 2001/14Google Scholar
  34. Nesporova A (2002) Why Unemployment Remains so High in Central and Eastern Europe. International Labor Office, Employment paper 2002/43Google Scholar
  35. O’Leary CJ, Kolodziejczyk P, Lazar G (1998) The net impact of active labor programs in Hungary and Poland. Int Labor Rev 137: 321–346Google Scholar
  36. Oyer P (2004) Recall bias among displaced workers. Econ Lett 82: 392–397Google Scholar
  37. Plesca M, Smith J (2007) Evaluating multi-treatment programs: theory and evidence from the U.S. Job training partnership act experiment. Empir Econ 32: 491–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Puhani P (1998) Advantage through Training? A Microeconometric Evaluation of the Employment Effects of Active Labor Market Programs in Poland. ZEW Discussion Paper no. 98–25, ManheimGoogle Scholar
  39. Romania National Institute of Statistics (2006) Quality Report on 2006 Structure of Household Labor SurveyGoogle Scholar
  40. Rosenbaum P (1995) Observational Studies. Springer Series in Statistics, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biom 27: 33–60Google Scholar
  42. Roy A (1951) Some thoughts on the distribution of earnings. Oxf Econ Pap 3: 135–145Google Scholar
  43. Rubin D (1974) Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J Educ Psychol 66: 688–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rubin D (1977) Assignment to treatment group on the basis of a covariate. J Educ Stat 2: 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sianesi B (2004) An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990 s. Rev Econ Stat 86: 133–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith J, Todd P (2005) Does matching overcome LaLonde’s critique of nonexperimental estimators? J Econom 125: 305–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Song Y (2007) Recall bias in the displaced workers survey: are layoffs really lemons? Labour Econ 14: 335–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Terrell K, Munich D (1995) An Overview of Labor Market Policies in the Czech Republic. Paper presented at the OECD Technical Workshop, “What can we learn from the experience of transition countries with labour market policies,” ViennaGoogle Scholar
  49. Terrell K, Sorm V (1999) Labor market policies and unemployment in the Czech Republic. J Comp Econ 27: 33–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vidovic H (2004) Labour Markets and Employment Development in South East Europe in Survey of Economic and Social Challenges in South-East EuropeGoogle Scholar
  51. Vodopivec M (1999) Does the Slovenian public work program increase participants’ chances to find a job? J Comp Econ 27: 113–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walsh K, Kotzeva M, Dolle E, Dorenbos R (2001) Evaluation of the Net Impact of Active Labor Market Programs in Bulgaria. Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, BulgariaGoogle Scholar
  53. World Bank (2002) Evaluation of Active Labor Programs in Macedonia. Final Report. Social Reform and Technical Assistance Project. IDA-2722-MKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departament d’Economia i Història EconòmicaUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain
  2. 2.IMPAQ International LLCColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations