International Advances in Economic Research

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 283–293 | Cite as

Job Training Subsidies, Reemployment and Earnings in the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program

Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

Average job training subsidies in the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program vary by state due to the cost of particular training programs chosen by participants. This study partitions the higher and lower subsidy states from 2010 to 2014 and estimates differences in the effectiveness of their average subsidy levels on reemployment and subsequent earnings. The rationale for partitioning is that higher cost programs tend to be more occupation or skill oriented than lower cost programs and might, therefore, be more effective. There is found to be only a small increase in the rate of reemployment with increases in the subsidy across all states, though it is fractionally higher in the higher subsidy partition. The contemporaneous state-level macroeconomic conditions have virtually no effect on the rate of reemployment. There is also a small increase in subsequent earnings as the subsidy increases, but only in the lower subsidy partition. Increases in earnings across all states are attributed to the state-level macroeconomic conditions, particularly inflation. These findings emerge from a different empirical approach than taken in earlier studies, but corroborate that the program's job training requirement has been only moderately effective overall, though better at promoting reemployment than higher earnings.

Keywords

Trade adjustment assistance Job training Reemployment Earnings 

JEL Classification

F15 I00 

References

  1. Bohanon, C. E., & Flowers, M. (1998). The unintended consequences of trade adjustment assistance. Cato Journal, 18(1), 65–74.Google Scholar
  2. Charnovitz, S. (1986). Worker adjustment: The missing ingredient in trade policy. California Management Review, 28(2), 156–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Decker, P. T., & Corson, W. (1995). International trade and worker displacement: Evaluation of the trade adjustment assistance program. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48(4), 758–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Marcal, L. E. (2001). Does trade adjustment assistance help trade displaced workers? Contemporary Economic Policy, 19(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Reynolds, K. M., & Palatucci, J. S. (2012). Does trade adjustment assistance make a difference? Contemporary Economic Policy, 30(1), 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (2010–2014). www.bea.gov/regional/index.htm.
  7. U.S. Department of Labor, Education and Training Administration (2002). Trade Act Participant Report. www.doleta.gov/tradeact/2002law.cfm.
  8. U.S. Department of Labor, Education and Training Administration (2009). Trade Act Participant Report. www.doleta.gov/tradeact/2009.cfm.
  9. U.S. Department of Labor, Education and Training Administration (2010–2014). Trade Act Participant Report/. www.doleta.gov/tradeact/.

Copyright information

© International Atlantic Economic Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Villanova School of BusinessVillanova UniversityVillanovaUSA

Personalised recommendations