Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-cszgk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-16T03:28:54.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unemployment and the Structure of Unemployment Benefits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Keith Norris
Keith Norris*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Murdoch University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Analysis suggests that the higher the replacement ratio, that is the level of unemployment benefit relative to average earnings, the higher the level of unemployment is likely to be. This effect comes about in two main ways. The replacement ratio will influence both the rate of inflow into unemployment and the period for which people remain unemployed. The empirical evidence supports these propositions although the sensitivity of unemployment to changes in the replacement ratio is fairly weak. In the light of equity considerations reducing unemployment benefits as a policy weapon to counteract unemployment is thus not a viable option. Changing the rules relating to part-time earnings and unemployment benefit however could reduce long-term unemployment.

Information

Type
Symposium: Options to Reduce Long Term Unemployment
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , June 1994 , pp. 38 - 45
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I am grateful to Philip Lewis for helpful comments on a previous version.

References

Atkinson, A.B., Micklewright, J. (1991) ‘Unemployment compensation and labor market transitions: A critical review”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 29, 4, pp. 1679–1727.Google Scholar
Bradbury, B. (1994) ‘Changing the income test for the unemployed’, Social Policy Research Centre Newsletter, No. 52, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
Fahrer, J., Pease, A. (1973) ‘The unemployment-vacancy relationship in Australia’, Australian Economic Review, No. 4, pp. 43–57.Google Scholar
Lewis, P.E.T., Kirby, M.G. (1988) ‘A new approach to modelling the effects of incomes policies’, Economics Letters, Vol. 28, pp. 81–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, L.F., Meyer, B.D. (1990) ‘The impact of the potential duration of unemployment benefits on the duration of unemployment’, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 41, 1, pp. 45–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layard, R., Nickell, S., Jackman, R. (1991) Unemployment, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Nickeil, S., et al (1989) The nature of unemployment in Britain, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
OECD (1991) ‘Unemployment rules and labour market policy’ in Employment Outlook, pp. 199–236.Google Scholar
Pissarides, C.A. (1991) ‘Real wages and unemployment in Australia’, Economica, Vol. 58, 229, pp. 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, J., Wadsworth, J. (1993) ‘Unemployment benefit levels of search activity’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 55, 1, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Trivedi, P.K., Kapuscinski, C. (1985) ‘Determinants of inflow into unemployment and the probability of leaving unemployment: A disaggregated analysis’ in Volker, P.A. (ed.) The structure and duration of unemployment in Australia, AGPS, Canberra.Google Scholar