Efficiency Measurement: Economic and Institutional Influences on the Efficiency of the Dutch Social Benefits System

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to investigate the influence of environmental factors on labour market performance. Performance is defined in terms of preventing people from flowing into the social benefits system and enhancing the flow of people from the social benefits system into employment, which we measure by the reciprocal of the ratio of the number of social beneficiaries compared to the size of the labour force. To deal with the problem of multidimensionality and the influence of environmental factors, we introduce the concept of an output distance function. We apply this model to regional data in the Netherlands for the period 1998–2005 and estimate the parameters of the model. We conclude that the specific environment in the regions – quantified in this research by economic, demographic and institutional incentive variables – influences regional performances in terms of the number of recipients of full-time unemployment benefits, occupational disability benefits and social assistance benefits.

Keywords

benchmarking environment efficiency output distance function

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aigner

Lovell

C.A.K.

and Schmidt

(1977) ‘Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models’, Journal of Econometrics, 6, 21–37.

Althin

and Behrenz

(2004) An efficiency analysis of Swedish employment offices', International Review of Applied Economics, 18(4), 471–482.

Banker

R.D.

Charnes

and Cooper

(1984) ‘Some models for the estimation of technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis’, Management Science 30(9), 1078–1092.

Coelli

T.J.

and Perelman

(1996) Efficiency measurement, multi-output technologies and distance functions: With application to European railways, CREPP Working Paper 96/05, University of Liege.

Färe

and Grosskopf

(1990) ‘A distance function approach to price efficiency’, Journal of Public Economics, 43, 123–126.

Grosskopf

Hayes

and Hirschberg

(1995) ‘Fiscal Stress and the Production of Public Safety: A Distance Function Approach’, Journal of Public Economics, 57(2), 277–296.

De Koning

(2005) Active Labour Market Policies: Relevance, Expenditure and Effectiveness, SEOR Working paper 2005/2, Rotterdam.

Kumbhakar

S.C.

and Lovell

C.A.K.

(2000) Stochastic Frontier Analysis, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Paul

Morrison C.J.

Johnston

W.E.

and Frengley

G.A.G.

(2000) ‘Efficiency in New Zealand Sheep and Beef Farming: The Impacts of Regulatory Reform’, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(2), 325–37.

10.

Mosley

and Müller

(2004) Benchmarking Employment Services: Reintegration Rates and Cost Efficiency of German PES Agencies, paper presented at the TLM. NET work package 5 meeting, Rotterdam, 26–27 April.

11.

Schütz

and Mosley

(2005) ‘Leistungsvergleich von Arbeitsargenturen: Eingliederungsquoten als Performanzindicator für Maßnahmenerfolg’, in Schütz

and Mosley

(eds.) Arbeitsargenturen auf dem Prüfstand: Liestungs-vergleich und Reformpraxis der Arbeitsvermittlung, Berlin, Edition Sigma.

12.

Shephard

R.W.

(1970) Theory of Cost and Production Functions, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

13.

UWV (2005). Kroniek sociale verzekeringen (Chronicle of social insurances).

14.

Van Donk

and De Koning

(2005) Mediation services and the outflow from short-term unemployment: Average and relative effectiveness of public employment offices, SEOR Working paper 2005/3, Rotterdam.

15.

Vassiliev

Luzzi

Ferro G.

Fluckiger

and Ramirez

J.V.

(2006) ‘Unemployment and employment offices' efficiency: What can be done?’, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40(3), 169–186.

Efficiency Measurement: Economic and Institutional Influences on the Efficiency of the Dutch Social Benefits System – An Empirical Application

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References