2010
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1597151
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Targeting - A New Take-Up? Non-Take-Up of Social Assistance in Germany after Social Policy Reforms

Abstract: Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
35
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
6
35
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The authors find that -given eligibility -immigrant households are no more likely to take-up benefits than native households. Bruckmeier and Wiemers (2012) confirm this result based on more recent data. Using the 1984-1996 waves of the SOEP, Riphahn (2004) jointly modeled panel attrition, labor force status, and household social assistance dependence.…”
Section: Institutional Background and Previous Empirical Findingssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The authors find that -given eligibility -immigrant households are no more likely to take-up benefits than native households. Bruckmeier and Wiemers (2012) confirm this result based on more recent data. Using the 1984-1996 waves of the SOEP, Riphahn (2004) jointly modeled panel attrition, labor force status, and household social assistance dependence.…”
Section: Institutional Background and Previous Empirical Findingssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Certainly, the broad and mostly very critical public debate enhanced awareness of the new benefit program. In this situation, many observers expect an increase in the propensity to take up benefits given eligibility (e.g., Bruckmeier and Wiemers, 2011).…”
Section: Institutional Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A refusal to accept job offers or a lacking willingness for job search activities can lead to benefit cuts. Compared to the previous systems of social and unemployment assistance, the amount of earned income that benefit recipients are allowed to retain is higher under UB II (Bruckmeier and Wiemers, 2011). Recipients can earn a gross income of 100 € per month before their welfare benefits are reduced.…”
Section: Institutional Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 91%