Estimating the Effects of a Time-Limited Earnings Subsidy for Welfare-Leavers
对福利退出者提供限时工资补贴的效应估计AI 解读 ↓
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明
本页整理公开书目信息，不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成，未完成全文核验，可能有误；具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本，未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要；缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录，不合计多个记录；关联记录可能包含正式发表版本，不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零，引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配，同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列，再参考通用方法与发表日期。
分类依据与纠错
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类：摘要使用随机分组的福利政策实验估计工资补贴效应，并分析不同激励对政策影响的贡献，直接涉及因果推断。
反馈分类问题
正在核对关联版本…
代码、数据与补充材料
正在核对对应版本的资源…
关注这篇论文的作者
对福利退出者提供限时工资补贴的效应估计
- 研究问题
- 对福利退出者提供限时工资补贴时，要求一年内开始全职工作与取得资格后的补贴激励，分别如何影响福利退出和再次进入？
- 方法与思路
- 作者利用随机分组的自给自足项目，结合简单最优化模型建立福利参与计量模型，区分资格建立激励和取得资格后的补贴激励。
- 材料陈述的贡献
- 摘要称，两类激励解释了随机分组后第十五个月达峰并较快消退的效应，资格建立激励约占峰值一半；工资无持久影响，长期福利参与效应很小或没有。
- 阅读关注点
- 应核对随机分组如何支持总体效应估计，以及两类激励分解和已取得资格者的进入、退出效应额外依赖哪些模型与选择条件。
- 阅读边界
- 摘要未说明激励分解所需的识别条件、参数估计方法或不确定性；长期结果的观测期限和适用人群也需在全文中核对。
原文摘要
In the Self Sufficiency Project (SSP) welfare demonstration, members of a randomly assigned treatment group could receive a subsidy for full-time work. The subsidy was available for 3 years, but only to people who began working full time within 12 months of random assignment. A simple optimizing model suggests that the eligibility rules created an “establishment” incentive to find a job and leave welfare within a year of random assignment, and an “entitlement” incentive to choose work over welfare once eligibility was established. Building on this insight, we develop an econometric model of welfare participation that allows us to separate the two effects and estimate the impact of the earnings subsidy on welfare entry and exit rates among those who achieved eligibility. The combination of the two incentives explains the time profile of the experimental impacts, which peaked 15 months after random assignment and faded relatively quickly. Our findings suggest that about half of the peak impact of SSP was attributable to the establishment incentive. Despite the extra work effort generated by SSP, the program had no lasting impact on wages and little or no long-run effect on welfare participation.