Social Indicators Research

, Volume 130, Issue 1, pp 389–414 | Cite as

Speculation on a Flexicurity Index for Disabled People: The Italian Case

  • M. AgovinoEmail author
  • A. Rapposelli


The aim of this paper is to analyze a flexicurity index for disabled people by using Italian regional data. To this purpose, the empirical results are based on a composite index denoted as Mazziotta-Pareto Index. Our results show that Northern Italy regions show a higher flexicurity degree than Southern Italy ones. In addition, by estimating an augmented matching function, we verify that flexicurity increases the probability of finding employment for a disabled person. In particular, we test that the flexicurity indicator that gives more weight to the economic independence of disabled people represents the indicator that most favors the labour matching process.


Disabled people Public policy Non-labour market discrimination Flexibility Social security 

JEL Classification

J08 J48 J65 R12 


  1. Agovino M., & Garofalo A. (2014). Flexicurity index for disabled people: Evidence from Italy, Mimeo, Sottoposto a RISS.Google Scholar
  2. Agovino M., & Parodi G. (2012). Civilian disability pensions as an antipoverty policy instrument? A spatial analysis of Italian provinces, 2003–2005. In G. Parodi & D. Sciulli (Eds.), Social exclusion. AIEL Series in Labour Economics. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-7908-2772-9_8
  3. Agovino, M., & Rapposelli, A. (2012). Employment of disabled people according to Law 68/99. A multidimensional analysis at regional level. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociale, 1, 3–23.Google Scholar
  4. Agovino, M., & Rapposelli, A. (2013a). Inclusion of disabled people in the Italian labour market: An efficiency analysis of Law 68/99 at regional level. Quality & Quantity 47(3), 1577–1588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Agovino, M., & Rapposelli, A. (2013b). Employment of disabled people in the private sector. An analysis at the level of Italian Provinces according to article 13 of Law 68/99. Quality & Quantity, 48(3), 1537–1552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Agovino, M., & Rapposelli, A. (2014). Employment of disabled people in the private sector. An analysis at the level of Italian Provinces according to article 13 of Law 68/99. Quality & Quantity. doi: 10.1007/s11135-013-9851-3.Google Scholar
  7. Altavilla, C., & Caroleo, F. E. (2011). Asymmetric effects of national-based active labour market policies. Regional Studies, 47(9), 1–25.Google Scholar
  8. Bekker S., & Wilthagen T. (2008). Europe’s pathways to flexicurity: Lessons presented from and to the Netherlands. Intereconomics, March/April, 68–73.Google Scholar
  9. Biehl, D. (1991). Il ruolo delle Infrastrutture nello sviluppo regionale. In F. Boscacci & G. Gorla (Eds.), Economie locali in ambiente competitivo. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
  10. Boeri, T. (1997). Learning from transition economies: Assessing labor market policies across Central and Eastern Europe. Journal of Comparative Economics, 25, 366–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boeri, T., & Burda, M. C. (1996). Active labor market policies, job matching and the Czech miracle. European Economic Review, 40, 805–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boeri, T., Cahuc, P., Crnkovic, S., Kollonay-Lehoczky, C., & Wilthagen, T. (2007). Flexicurity pathways, turning hurdles into stepping stones. Brussels: Report by the European Expert group on Flexicurity.Google Scholar
  13. Broersma, L., & Van Ours, J. C. (1999). Job searchers, job matches and the elasticity of matching. Labour Economics, 6(1), 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caroleo, F. E., & Pastore, F. (2003). Youth participation in the labour market in Germany, Spain and Sweden. In T. Hammer (Ed.), Youth unemployment and social exclusion in Europe. A comparative study (pp. 115–141). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  15. Caroleo, F. E., & Pastore, F. (2005). La disoccupazione giovanile in Italia. La riforma della formazione come alternativa alla flessibilità. Economia e Lavoro, 39(2), 49–66.Google Scholar
  16. De Muro, P., Mazziotto, M., & Pareto, A. (2011). Composite indices of development and poverty: an application to MDGs. Social Indicators Research, 104, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dietrich, H. (2003). Scheme participation and employment outcome of young unemployed—Empirical findings from nine European countries. In T. Hammer (Ed.), Youth unemployment and social exclusion in Europe. A comparative study (pp. 83–108). Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eichorst, W., Kendzia, M. J., Knudsen, J. B., Hanse, M. O., Vandeweghe, B., Vanhoren, I., et al. (2010). The mobility and integration of people with disabilities into the labour market. IZA, research report no. 29.Google Scholar
  19. European Commission. (2006). Employment in Europe 2006. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  20. European Commission. (2007a). Towards common principles of flexicurity: More and better jobs through flexibility and security. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  21. European Commission. (2007b). Employment in Europe 2007. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  22. Fahr, R., & Sunde, U. (2004). Occupational job creation: Patterns and implications. Oxford Economic Papers, 56, 407–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hansen, L. P. (1982). Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica, 50(4), 1029–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hujer, R., & Zeiss, C. (2003). Macroeconomic impacts of ALMP on the matching process in West Germany. IZA DP no. 915.Google Scholar
  25. Layard, R., Nickell, S. J., & Jackman, R. (1991). Unemployment: macroeconomic performance and the labour market. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lechner, M., & Wunsch, C. (2008). What did all the money do? On the general ineffectiveness of recent German labour market programmes. Kyklos, 61(1), 134–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lehmann, H. (1995). Active labour market policies in the OECD and in selected transition economies. Working paper no. 539-96, World Bank Policy Reasearch.Google Scholar
  28. Madsen, P. K. (2002a). Flexicurity through labour market policies and institutions in Denmark. In P. Auer & S. Cazes (Eds.), Employment stability in an age of flexibility (pp. 59–105). Geneve: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  29. Madsen, P. K. (2002b). The Danish model of flexicurity: A paradise—With some snakes. In H. Sarfati & G. Bonoli (Eds.), Employment protection reforms in international perspective (pp. 243–265). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  30. Madsen, P. K. (2004). The Danish model of “flexicurity”: experiences and lessons. Transfer, 10, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Madsen, P. K. (2007). Distribution of responsibility for social security and labour market policy. Country report: Denmark. AIAS working paper 07/51. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.Google Scholar
  32. Mazziotta, C. (2005). La stima del capitale pubblico a livello regionale: una riflessione di metodo”. In M. Carlucci & G. Esposito (Eds.), Statistica economica e strumenti di analisi. Roma: Studi in memoria di Antonino Giannone, ISCONA.Google Scholar
  33. Mazziotta, C., Mazziotta, M., Pareto, A., & Vidoli, F. (2010). La sintesi di indicatori territoriali di dotazione infrastrutturale: Metodi di costruzione e procedure di ponderazione a confronto. Rivista di Economia e Statistica del Territorio, 1, 7–33.Google Scholar
  34. Mazziotta, M., & Pareto, A. (2007). Un indicatore sintetico di dotazione infrastrutturale: Il metodo delle penalità per coefficiente di variazione. Lo sviluppo regionale nell’Unione Europea—Obiettivi, strategie, politiche. Atti della XXVIII Conferenza Italiana di Scienze Regionali, AISRe, Bolzano.Google Scholar
  35. McAnaney, D., & Wynne, R. (2010). Active inclusion of young people with disabilities or health problems: background paper. Luxembourg: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.Google Scholar
  36. McVicar, D. (2006). Why do disability benefit rolls vary between regions? A review of the evidence from the USA and the UK. Regional Studies, 40(5), 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McVicar, D. (2008). Why have UK disability benefit rolls grown so much? Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 114–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ministry of Employment. (2006–2007). Quarta relazione al parlamento sullo stato di attuazione della legge 12 marzo 1999, n. 68. Norme per il diritto al lavoro dei disabili, Roma.Google Scholar
  39. Ministry of Employment. (2008–2009). Quinta relazione al parlamento sullo stato di attuazione della legge 12 marzo 1999, n. 68. Norme per il diritto al lavoro dei disabili, Roma.Google Scholar
  40. Ministry of Employment. (2010–2011). Sesta relazione al parlamento sullo stato di attuazione della legge 12 marzo 1999, n. 68. Norme per il diritto al lavoro dei disabili, Roma.Google Scholar
  41. OECD. (2004). Employment protection regulation and labour market performance. In OECD (Ed.), OECD employment outlook (pp. 61–101). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  42. OECD. (2009a). Sickness, disability and work: Keeping on track in the economic downturn. Stockholm: Background Paper for the High-Level Forum.Google Scholar
  43. OECD. (2009b). Sickness, disability and work. Addressing policy challenges in OECD countries. Stockholm: OECD High-Level Forum.Google Scholar
  44. Orlando, N., & Patrizio, M. (2006). Il collocamento mirato dei disabili: L’applicazione della legge 68/1999 nella Provincia di Bolzano. In G. Parodi (Ed.), Aspetti socioeconomici della disabilità (pp. 179–216). Roma: ARACNE editrice.Google Scholar
  45. Parodi, G. (2007). Persone disabili istituzionalizzate in Italia. In G. Parodi (Ed.), Aspetti socioeconomici della disabilità (pp. 97–112). Roma: ARACNE editrice.Google Scholar
  46. Parodi, G., & Sciulli, D. (2008). Disability in Italian households: Income, poverty and labour market participation. Applied Economics, 40(20), 2615–2630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Puhani, P. (1999). Evaluating active labour market policies—Empirical evidence for Poland during transition. ZEW Economic Studies, Vol. 5. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.Google Scholar
  48. Rogowski, R. (2008). Governance of the European social model: The case of flexicurity. Intereconomics, March/April, 82–91.Google Scholar
  49. Silva, H. B., Disney, R., & Martin, S. J. (2010). Disability, capacity for work and the business cycle: An international perspective. Economic Policy, 25, 483–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Staiger, D., & Stock, J. H. (1997). Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica, 65(3), 557–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van Ours, J. C. (2004). The locking-in of subsidized jobs. Journal of Comparative Economics, 32(1), 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Viebrock, E., & Clasen, J. (2009). Flexicurity a state of the art review. REC-WP 01/2009, Working papers on the reconciliation of work and welfare in Europe. RECWOWE Publication, Dissemination and Dialogue Centre, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  53. Wilthagen, T., & Rogoswski, R. (2002). The legal regulation of transitional labour markets. In G. Schmid & B. Gazier (Eds.), The dynamics of full employment (pp. 233–273). Cheltenham: Edwar Elgar.Google Scholar
  54. Wilthagen, T., & Tros, F. (2004). The concept of flexicurity: A new approach to regulating employment and labour markets. European Review of Labour and Research, 10(2), 166–186.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economic and Legal StudiesUniversity of Naples “Parthenope”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Department of Economic Studies“G. D’Annunzio” University of Chieti-PescaraPescaraItaly

Personalised recommendations