Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:38:22.772Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Employers and Active Labour Market Policies: Typologies and Evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2017

Thomas Bredgaard
Thomas Bredgaard*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Aalborg University, Denmark E-mail: thomas@dps.aau.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Among scholars and practitioners, there is a growing recognition of the important role of employers in the success of active labour market policies in Europe. However, there is a lack of systematic evidence about why and how employers engage in active labour market policies. In this article, the preferences and behaviour of employers towards active labour market policies are untangled. A typology of four types of employers is constructed for analytical and empirical analysis. By distinguishing positive and negative preferences from participation and non-participation, four types of employers are identified: the committed employer, the dismissive employer, the sceptical employer and the passive employer. The utility of the typology is tested with survey data on employer engagement in Danish ALMPs. The findings indicate that only a minority of Danish employers can be classified as ‘committed employers’, and the majority are either ‘dismissive’ or ‘passive’ employers. In the final section, this finding and the usefulness of the typology for analytical and empirical research is discussed.

Keywords

active labour market policyDenmarkemployer engagementemployment
Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 2018 , pp. 365 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

References

Aa, P. and Berkel, R. (2014) ‘Innovating job activation by involving employers’, International Social Security Review, 6, 2, 11–27.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2000) Employment Revival in Europe – Labour Market Success in Austria, Denmark, Ireland and the Netherlands, Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S. (1957) The Economics of Discrimination, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bredgaard, T. (2011) ‘When the government governs: closing compliance gaps in Danish employment policies’, International Journal of Public Administration, 34, 1, 764–74.Google Scholar
Bredgaard, T. (2014) Virksomhedernes Sociale Ansvar – et Studie i Politisk Forandring [Corporate Social Responsibility – A Study of Political change], Aalborg University Press.Google Scholar
Bredgaard, T. (2015) ‘Evaluating what works for whom in active labour market policies’, European Journal of Social Security, 17, 4, 436–52.Google Scholar
Bredgaard, T. and Halkjær, J. L. (2016) ‘Employers and the implementation of active labour market policies’, Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 6, 1, 47–59.Google Scholar
Card, D., Kluve, J. and Weber, A. (2010) ‘Active labour market policy evaluations: a meta-analysis’, The Economic Journal, 120, 452–77.Google Scholar
Coleman, N., McGinigal, S., Thomas, A., Fu, E. and Hingley, S. (2014) ‘Evaluation of the youth contract wage incentive: wave two research’, DWP Research Report no. 864, London: Department of Work and Pensions.Google Scholar
Danish Economic Council (2012) Dansk Økonomi – Efterår 2012 [The Danish Economy – Autumn 2012], Copenhagen: Det Økonomiske Råd.Google Scholar
European Commission (1993) White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment – the Challenges Ahead and Ways Forward in the 21st Century, COM 93(700), Brussels: The European Commission.Google Scholar
Farnsworth, K. (2006) ‘Capital to the rescue? New Labour's business solutions to old welfare problems’, Critical Social Policy, 26, 4, 817–42.Google Scholar
Fletcher, D. R. (2004) ‘Demand-led programmes: challenging labour-market inequalities or reinforcing them?’, Environment and Planning, 22, 115–28.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1962) Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gore, T. (2005) ‘Extending employability or solving employers’ recruitment problems? Demand-led approaches as an instrument of labour market policy’, Urban Studies, 42, 2, 341–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, J. S. and Pierson, P. (2002) ‘Business power and social policy: employers and the formation of the American welfare state’, Politics and Society, 30, 2, 277–325.Google Scholar
Hall, P. A. and Soskice, D. (eds.) (2001) Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hasluck, C. (2011) ‘Employers and the recruitment of unemployed people: an evidence review’, Briefing paper December 2011, UK Commission for Employment and Skills.Google Scholar
Ibsen, F. (1999) ‘Er det rationelt for virksomhederne at påtage sig et socialt ansvar?’ [Is corporate social responsibility rational for companies?], Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 1, 2, 35–45.Google Scholar
Ingold, J. and Stuart, M. (2014) ‘The demand-side of active labour market policies: a regional study of employer engagement in the work programme’, Journal of Social Policy, 44, 3, 443–62.Google Scholar
Ingold, J. and Valizade, D. (2015) ‘Employer engagement in active labour market policies in the UK and Denmark: a survey of employers’, Policy Report no. 6, Centre for Employment Relations, Innovation and change (CERIC), Leeds University Business School.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, H. (2002) Consensus, Cooperation and Conflict – The Policy-Making Process in Denmark, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Kluve, J. (2006) ‘Effectiveness of European active labour market policy’, IZA Discussion Paper no. 2018, Institute for the Study of Labour, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
Kluve, J. (2010) ‘The effectiveness of European active labour market programs’, Labour Economics, 17, 904–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, C. A. and Vesan, P. (2012) ‘Why public employment services always fail: double-sided asymmetric information and the placement of low-skill workers in six European countries’, Public Administration, 90, 2, 466–79.Google Scholar
Lodemel, I. and Trickey, H. (2001) An Offer You Can't Refuse – Workfare in International Perspective, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Mandal, R. and Osborg Ose, S. (2015) ‘Social responsibility at company level and inclusion of disabled persons: the case of Norway’, Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 17, 2, 167–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, C. J. (2004a) ‘Reinventing welfare regimes: employers and the implementation of active social policy’, World Politics, 57, 1, 39–69.Google Scholar
Martin, C. J. (2004b) ‘Corporatism from the firm perspective: employers and social policy in Denmark and Britain’, British Journal of Political Science, 25, 1, 127–48.Google Scholar
Martin, C. J. and Swank, D. (2012) The Political Construction of Business Interests: Coordination, Growth and Equality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, M. (2013) ‘Revisiting the role of business in welfare state politics: neocorporatist versus firm-level organisation and their divergent influence on employer support for social policies’, Comparative European Politics, 11, 1, 22–48.Google Scholar
OECD (1994) The OECD Jobs Study, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (2015) OECD Employment Outlook 2015, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Olson, M. (1971) The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Paster, T. (2013) ‘Business and welfare state development – why did employers accept social reforms?’, World Politics, 65, 3, 416–51.Google Scholar
Peck, J. (2001) Workfare States, New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Rosholm, M. and Svarer, M. (2011) ‘Effekter af den virksomhedsrettede indsats i den aktive arbejdsmarkedspolitik’ [Outcomes of company-based activation programs in active labour market policies], Paper for the Danish Labour Market Administration.Google Scholar
Salognon, M. (2007) ‘Reorienting companies’ hiring behaviour: an innovative “back-to-work” method in France’, Work, Employment and Society, 21, 4, 713–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, G. (1998) ‘Transitional labour markets: a new European employment strategy’, WZB Discussion paper, Wissenschaftszentrum, Berlin, 98–206.Google Scholar
Schmid, G. and Gazier, B. (2002) The Dynamics of Full Employment – Social Integration through Transitional Labour Markets, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Thelen, K. (2014) Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torfing, J. (1999) ‘Workfare with welfare: recent reforms of the Danish welfare state’, Journal of European Social Policy, 9, 1, 5–28.Google Scholar