2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2007.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Creating jobs through public subsidies: An empirical analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
27
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, Girma et al (2008) examine the effects of government grants to firms in Ireland, comparing employment in treated and untreated firms. They also find positive effects on employment, particularly for domestic-owned firms.…”
Section: Previous Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, Girma et al (2008) examine the effects of government grants to firms in Ireland, comparing employment in treated and untreated firms. They also find positive effects on employment, particularly for domestic-owned firms.…”
Section: Previous Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lastly, we estimate the treatment effect of EURJVs on TFP through the generalized method of moments (GMM) system estimator for panel data (Blundell and Bond, 1998. For analogous approaches in similar contexts, see Girma, Görg, and Strobl, 2007;Girma et al, 2008). As our dataset is very informative on sample NTBFs, to the usual set of instruments we are able to add additional instruments aimed at capturing exogenous shifts of the variables of interest (for a similar approach see, for example, Leiponen, 2005;Benfratello and Sembenelli, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of problems can emerge in this step if we rely on the subjective assessment of grant recipients or policy-maker. Alternatively, if general survey data are used and non-recipients are included as a control or comparison group in statistical or econometric analyses we run into a number of other issues such as selection bias (Girma et al, 2008). Another approach commonly used in the United States involves individuals randomly assigned to a programme and is seen as a more accurate, albeit less ethical, approach as the control group is deliberately denied assistance (Card et al, 2010).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%