If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | |||||||||||
![]() American Journal of Agricultural EconomicsVolume 85 Issue 4, Pages 914 - 927 Published Online: 14 Oct 2003 © 2009 Agricultural and Applied Economics Association
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 181K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking Rural/Urban Welfare Program and Labor Force Participation This research has been supported by a cooperative agreement from the USDA Economic Research Service, Hatch Act, and State of Iowa funds. The authors thank David Figlio, Peter Orazem, Stan Johnson, Wally Huffman, Mark Partridge, Euan Phimister, Steve Vogel, Helen Jensen, the anonymous referees, and seminar participants at Iowa State University and Aberdeen University. Journal Paper No. J-19746 of the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station, Ames, Iowa. Copyright 2003 American Agricultural Economics Association KEYWORDS labor force • Oaxaca • rural • TANF program • welfare reform ABSTRACTNonmetro poor in the Midwest participate more in the labor force and less in welfare programs than metro poor. We formalize how household composition, capital, labor market conditions, and state-specific regulations define opportunity sets, then estimate a bivariate binomial probit model of work and program participation choices. An Oaxaca decomposition analysis is conducted to compare differences in characteristics to differences in behavior in explaining the two groups' choices. We find no behavioral basis for the difference in labor market participation. And while most of the lower Midwestern nonmetro welfare program participation is due to demographics, some is due to different life-cycle behavior. [Received October 2001; accepted January 2003.] |
|
Become a new member!
| |||||||||