Economic Change and Restructuring

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 255–275 | Cite as

(In)Efficiency of matching: the case of a post-transition economy

  • Joanna TyrowiczEmail author
  • Tomasz Jeruzalski


The aim of this paper is twofold. First, we provide estimates of the evolution in matching efficiencies in Poland, demonstrating decrease in estimated efficiency scores. These trends are accompanied by decreasing outputs in the matching function, as well as the lowering of the elasticities. Second, we relate the estimated efficiency scores to the use of active labour market measures. We find that job brokering intensity is conducive to matching efficiency, but active labour market policies coverage in general is not.


Matching efficiency Poland Active labour market policies 



We are extremely grateful to Jan Svejnar, as well as participants of AIEL 2010, EALE 2010 and EACES 2010 conferences as well as seminars at the University of Warsaw, Institute for Social Studies in Rotterdam and National Bank of Poland for valuable comments. Last but not least, two anonymous referees provided constructive remarks, for which we are grateful. Part of the research has been performed while Joanna Tyrowicz has been a visiting researcher at IZA, Bonn and Columbia University, New York whose support is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. Battese GE, Coelli TJ (1995) A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empir Econ 20(2):32–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Calmfors L (1993) Centralisation of Wage bargaining and macroeconomic performance: a survey. OECD economics Department Working Papers 131. OECD Economics DepartmentGoogle Scholar
  3. Calmfors L, Forslund A, Hemstrom M (2002) Does Active Labour Market Policy Work? Lessons from the Swedish Experiences. Seminar Papers 700, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic StudiesGoogle Scholar
  4. Calmfors L, Skedinger P (1995) Does active labour market policy increase employment? theoretical considerations and some empirical evidence from Sweden. Oxford Rev Econ Policy 11(1):91–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coles MG, Petrongolo B (2002) A Test Between Unemployment Theories Using Matching Data. CEPR Discussion Papers 3241. C.E.P.R. Discussion PapersGoogle Scholar
  6. Coles MG, Smith E (1998) Marketplaces and matching. Int Econ Rev 39(1):54–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Destefanis S, Fonseca R (2007) Matching efficiency and labour market reform in Italy. A macroeconometric assessment. labour 21:57–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dmitrijeva J, Hazans M (2007) A stock-flow matching approach to evaluation of public training program in a high unemployment environment. Labour 21(3):503–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fahr R, Sunde U (2002) Estimations of occupational and regional matching efficiencies using stochastic production Frontier Models. IZA Discussion Papers 552, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)Google Scholar
  10. Fahr R, Sunde U (2005) Regional dependencies in Job creation: an efficiency analysis for Western Germany. IZA Discussion Papers 1660, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)Google Scholar
  11. Gregg P, Petrongolo B (2005) Stock-flow matching and the performance of the Labor Market. Eur Econ Rev 49:1987–2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hagen T (2003) Three approaches to the evaluation of active labour market policy in East Germany Using Regional Data. Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  13. Hynninen S-M (2009) Matching in local labor markets: a stochastic Frontier Approach. J Prod Anal 31:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ibourk A, Maillard B, Perelman S, Sneessens HR (2004) Aggregate matching efficiency: a stochastic production Frontier Approach, France 1990-1994. Empirica 31:1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehmann H (1995) Active labor market policies in the OECD and in selected transition economies. Policy Research Working Paper Series 1502, The World BankGoogle Scholar
  16. Meyer BD, Sullivan JX (2003) Measuring the well-being of the poor using income and consumption. NBER Working Papers 9760, National Bureau of Economic Research, IncGoogle Scholar
  17. ML&SA (2005) Raport z badania ankietowego dotyczacego realizacji projektow w ramach dzialania 1.2 i 1.3 SPO RZL (Report from a survey study on the implementation of 1.2 and 1.3 of the Operational Programme Human Resources Development). Technical report, Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (ed. B. Piotrowski)Google Scholar
  18. ML&SA (2006) Badanie beneficjentow ostatecznych pomocy udzielonej w ramach SPO RZL 2004-2006, Technical report. Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (ed. A. Chroscicka)Google Scholar
  19. ML&SA (2008) Zatrudnienie w Polsce 2008, Technical report, Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs—Centrum Rozwoju Zasobow Ludzkich (ed. M. Bukowski)Google Scholar
  20. Munich D, Svejnar J (2006) Unemployment and worker-firm matching: theory and evidence from East and West Europe, mimeo. University of MichiganGoogle Scholar
  21. Munich D, Svejnar J (2007) Unemployment in East and West Europe. Labour Econ 14(4):681–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Munich D, Svejnar J, Terrel K (1998) Worker-firm matching and unemployment in transition to a market economy: Why Are The Czechs More Successful Than Others. University of Michigan mimeo, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  23. Munich D, Svejnar J, Terrell K (1997) The worker-firm matching in the transition: (Why) are the Czechs more successful than others?. Working Paper 107, The William Davidson InstituteGoogle Scholar
  24. Petrongolo B, Pissarides CA (2001) Looking Into the black box: a survey of the matching function. J Econ Literature 39(2):390–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Puhani PA (1999) Estimating the effects of public training on polish unemployment by way of the augmented matching function approach. Technical reportGoogle Scholar
  26. Tyrowicz J, Wojcik P (2009) Regional unemployment dynamics in Poland—a convergence approach. In: Caroleo F, Pastore F (eds) A new regional Geography of Europe?. Physica Verlag, WurzburgGoogle Scholar
  27. Tyrowicz J, Wojcik P (2011) Nonlinear stochastic convergence analysis of regional unemployment rates in Poland. Rev Econ Anal 3(1):59–79Google Scholar
  28. Vassiliev A, Ferro Luzzi G, Fluckiger Y, Ramirez JV (2006) Unemployment and employment offices’ efficiency: what can be done?. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 40(3):169–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilson P, Hadley D, Asby C (2001) The influence of management characteristics on the technical efficiency of wheat farmers in eastern england. Agric Econ 24(3):329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Bank of Poland, Rimini Center for Economic Analysis WarsawUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  2. 2.University of WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations