Workforce or Workfare?



for this activity. The utility level for a person that is unemployed — and, therefore, par-
ticipating in workfare — is given by u(b, kr).
5 Individuals are endowed with an ordered
triple of characteristics (m, n, k). The joint distribution of these three characteristics is
denoted F (m, n, k) and the associated density, f (m, n, k). Apart from continuity, we
make no assumptions on the joint distribution function. Thus, the model admits an ar-
bitrary correlation structure among individual characteristics. For ease of notation only,
we assume that the support of the distribution is a cube [m, m]
× [n, n] × [k, k]. Individ-
uals that are indifferent between market work and public welfare benefits are described
by the equation

u(c(n), m) = u(b, kr)                                  (9)

For a fixed skill level n and tax-benefit system, (9) determines an upward-sloping locus
in (k, m)-space. We parameterize this locus by
m = φ(k, r). We suppress the dependence
of this locus on the parameters of the tax-transfer system
c(n) and b, but, given our focus
on workfare, make explicit the dependence of this locus on
r.6 Individuals above and to
the left of this locus remain out of the labor market, because these people either find
market work relatively more costly in terms of utility or find workfare relatively less
onerous. The mass of workers of skill type
n that choose market work is given by7

Ï [ ψ(,) f (m,n,k)dmdk.
k k m∏

(10)


An increase in r shifts the locus m = φ(k,r) upward, leading to increased participation
in market work. To see this, applying the Implicit Function Theorem to (9) yields

∂φ
∂r


kuι (b, kr) 0
uι(c(n),m) > .


(11)


5The model of Section 2 corresponds to the special case of k = 1 for all individuals.

6By the Implicit Function Theorem, d÷ = rul(b,rk)0.

∂k     ul (c(n),m)

7We are implicitly assuming that the locus φ(k, r) intersects the line k = k above m = m, so that for
each skill type there is some sufficiently low value of
m that induces market work. If this is not the case,
we can reformulate our analysis by parameterizing the locus as
k = η(m, r) and reversing the order of
integration in (10) and all subsequent integrals. Our results do not change.



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Voluntary Teaming and Effort
3. The name is absent
4. ENERGY-RELATED INPUT DEMAND BY CROP PRODUCERS
5. DETERMINANTS OF FOOD AWAY FROM HOME AMONG AFRICAN-AMERICANS
6. AMINO ACIDS SEQUENCE ANALYSIS ON COLLAGEN
7. Ultrametric Distance in Syntax
8. An Empirical Analysis of the Curvature Factor of the Term Structure of Interest Rates
9. The name is absent
10. Julkinen T&K-rahoitus ja sen vaikutus yrityksiin - Analyysi metalli- ja elektroniikkateollisuudesta
11. The name is absent
12. Spousal Labor Market Effects from Government Health Insurance: Evidence from a Veterans Affairs Expansion
13. The name is absent
14. The name is absent
15. AN EXPLORATION OF THE NEED FOR AND COST OF SELECTED TRADE FACILITATION MEASURES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WTO NEGOTIATIONS
16. The name is absent
17. Visual Perception of Humanoid Movement
18. AGRIBUSINESS EXECUTIVE EDUCATION AND KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE: NEW MECHANISMS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT INVOLVING THE UNIVERSITY, PRIVATE FIRM STAKEHOLDERS AND PUBLIC SECTOR
19. The Challenge of Urban Regeneration in Deprived European Neighbourhoods - a Partnership Approach
20. Income Mobility of Owners of Small Businesses when Boundaries between Occupations are Vague