Advertisement

The Effects of Welfare Benefits on the Duration of Welfare Spells: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Canada

  • Bernard Fortin
  • Denis Fougère
  • Guy Lacroix

Abstract

The goal of the provincial welfare programs in Canada is to meet the basic needs of low-income individuals and households. The Canadian welfare system is a universal system in that it applies to all individuals over the age of 18 who fit the financial criteria and an assets test. Persons under the age of 18 are eligible if they have children. The duration of the welfare benefits is practically unlimited and their amount is annually reevaluated under an indexing procedure that varies according to the characteristics of the claimant and the size of his or her household. The earnings are implicitly taxed at a rather high level, which varies according to the characteristics of the household.1 In 1993, this implicit taxation rate was at 73% for single people without children, 91% for couples without children, 59% for two-parent families with children and 26% for single-parent families with a child under the age of six.2

Keywords

Minimum Wage Transition Intensity Nonparametric Estimate Unemployment Benefit Unemployment Insurance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson P.A. (1992). “Time Varying Effects of Recall Expectation, a Reemployment Bonus, and Job Counseling on Unemployment Durations”, Journal of Human Resources, 2, S201–S221.Google Scholar
  2. Arulampalam W., M.B. Stewart (1995). “The Determinants of Individual Unemployment Durations in an Era of High Unemployment”, Economic Journal, 105, 321–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blank R.M. (1989), “Analyzing the Length of Welfare Spells”, Journal of Public Economics, 245–273.Google Scholar
  4. Dolton P., W. van der Klaauw (1995). “Leaving Teaching in the U.K.: a Duration Analysis”, Economic Journal, 105, 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Droesbeke J.J., B. Fichet, Ph. Tassi (1989). Analyse statistique des durées de vie. Modélisation des onnées censurées, Paris, Economica.Google Scholar
  6. Fitzgerald J. (1991). “Welfare Duration and the Marriage Market: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation”, Journal of Human Resources, 26, S45–S61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Földes A., L. Retjö, B.B. Winter (1981). “Strong Consistency Properties of Non Parametric Estimators for Randomly Censored Data: Estimation of Density and Failure Rates”, Period. Math. Hung., 12, 15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gottschalk P., R. Moffitt (1994). “Welfare Dependence: Concepts, Measures and Trends”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 84(2), 38–42.Google Scholar
  9. Hoynes H., T. MaCurdy (1994). “Has the Decline in Benefits Shortened Welfare Spells?”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 84(2), 43–48.Google Scholar
  10. Meyer B.D. (1990). “On Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Spells”, Econometrica, 58, 757–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Moffitt R. (1992). “Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review”, Journal of Economic Literature, 30(1), 1–61.Google Scholar
  12. O’Neil J., D.A. Wolf, L.J. Bassi, M.T. Hannan (1987). “The Duration of Welfare Spells”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69, 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tanner M.A., W.H. Wong (1983). “The Estimation of the Hazard Function from Randomly Censored Data by the Kernel Method”, Annals of Statistics, 11, 989–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard Fortin
    • 1
  • Denis Fougère
    • 2
  • Guy Lacroix
    • 1
  1. 1.Université LavalQuébec, and CIRANOMontréal
  2. 2.Crest-Insee and CNRSParis, and CEPRLondon

Personalised recommendations