Menu Expand

Effectiveness of Further Vocational Training in Germany – Empirical Findings for Persons Receiving Means-tested Unemployment Benefits

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style

Bernhard, S., Kruppe, T. Effectiveness of Further Vocational Training in Germany – Empirical Findings for Persons Receiving Means-tested Unemployment Benefits. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, 132(4), 501-526. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.132.4.501
Bernhard, Sarah and Kruppe, Thomas "Effectiveness of Further Vocational Training in Germany – Empirical Findings for Persons Receiving Means-tested Unemployment Benefits" Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch 132.4, 2012, 501-526. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.132.4.501
Bernhard, Sarah/Kruppe, Thomas (2012): Effectiveness of Further Vocational Training in Germany – Empirical Findings for Persons Receiving Means-tested Unemployment Benefits, in: Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, vol. 132, iss. 4, 501-526, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.132.4.501

Format

Effectiveness of Further Vocational Training in Germany – Empirical Findings for Persons Receiving Means-tested Unemployment Benefits

Bernhard, Sarah | Kruppe, Thomas

Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 132 (2012), Iss. 4 : pp. 501–526

13 Citations (CrossRef)

Additional Information

Article Details

Author Details

Sarah Bernhard, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB) Regensburger Straße 104, 90478 Nürnberg.

Thomas Kruppe, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB) Regensburger Straße 104, 90478 Nürnberg.

Cited By

  1. Cross-country comparison: does social democratic party power increase an employee’s perceived employability?

    Habicht, Isabel M.

    Frontiers in Sociology, Vol. 8 (2023), Iss.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1212553 [Citations: 0]
  2. Youth unemployment and active labor market policies in Europe

    Caliendo, Marco | Schmidl, Ricarda

    IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Vol. 5 (2016), Iss. 1

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40173-016-0057-x [Citations: 121]
  3. The Employment Effects of the Italian Minimum Guaranteed Income Scheme Reddito di Cittadinanza

    Maitino, Maria Luisa | Mariani, Marco | Patacchini, Valentina | Ravagli, Letizia | Sciclone, Nicola

    Italian Economic Journal, Vol. 10 (2024), Iss. 2 P.649

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40797-023-00263-1 [Citations: 1]
  4. Effekte von Teilqualifizierungen auf Beschäftigung und Einkommen

    Kruppe, Thomas | Lang, Julia | Osiander, Christopher

    KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Vol. 75 (2023), Iss. 4 P.477

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-023-00931-1 [Citations: 0]
  5. Activation programmes for women with a partner in Germany: Challenge or replication of traditional gender roles

    Kopf, Eva | Zabel, Cordula

    International Journal of Social Welfare, Vol. 26 (2017), Iss. 3 P.239

    https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12249 [Citations: 5]
  6. Refugee integration policy the Norwegian way – why good ideas fail and bad ideas prevail

    Djuve, Anne Britt | Kavli, Hanne Cecilie

    Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, Vol. 25 (2019), Iss. 1 P.25

    https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258918807135 [Citations: 17]
  7. Effectiveness of Active Labour Market Programmes on the Job Quality of Welfare Recipients in Germany

    DENGLER, KATHARINA

    Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 48 (2019), Iss. 4 P.807

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279419000114 [Citations: 25]
  8. Government-Sponsored Vocational Education for Adults

    McCall, B. | Smith, J. | Wunsch, C.

    2016

    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63459-7.00009-9 [Citations: 19]
  9. New Register Data from the German Public Employment Service on Counseling and Monitoring the Unemployed

    Hofmann, Barbara | Köhler, Markus

    Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 134 (2014), Iss. 1 P.129

    https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.134.1.129 [Citations: 1]
  10. Unobservable, but unimportant? The relevance of usually unobserved variables for the evaluation of labor market policies

    Caliendo, Marco | Mahlstedt, Robert | Mitnik, Oscar A.

    Labour Economics, Vol. 46 (2017), Iss. P.14

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2017.02.001 [Citations: 79]
  11. How to fight long-term unemployment: lessons from Germany

    Spermann, Alexander

    IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Vol. 4 (2015), Iss. 1

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40173-015-0039-4 [Citations: 10]
  12. Handbuch Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung

    Bildungsökonomie und Finanzierung von Weiterbildung

    Weiß, Reinhold

    2018

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-19979-5_28 [Citations: 4]
  13. Intensified activation for disadvantaged welfare recipients in Germany: does it work?

    Dengler, Katharina | Hohmeyer, Katrin | Moczall, Andreas | Wolff, Joachim

    International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 33 (2013), Iss. 5/6 P.289

    https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2012-0062 [Citations: 1]

Abstract

Further vocational training for the unemployed aims at enhancing their job prospects. This paper analyzes the effectiveness of subsidized training programs for means-tested unemployment benefit recipients in Germany. The empirical findings are based on rich administrative data from the German Federal Employment Agency using propensity score matching to construct a suitable comparison group. We consider the initiation of training in early 2005, just after the reform of the German means-tested benefit system, which aimed at activating hard-to-place job-seekers, and after the introduction of a voucher system as the sole assigning mechanism for vocational training. We estimated the effects of vocational training for several groups differentiated by age, gender, migration background, skills, program duration, length of time since last job and differences between East and West Germany. As a result, we show that vocational training has a considerable beneficial impact on participants as it raises the employment rate in the intermediate term by up to 13 percentage points, and – with a slightly lower impact – it reduces the number of unemployment benefit II recipients.