{"title":"更灵活,效率更低?意大利就业保护立法改革的影响","authors":"Francesco Stolfi, Oliver Fritsch","doi":"10.1080/13608746.2023.2238970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThrough a meta-analysis of all publicly available research over a span of 25 years, the article assesses the productivity impact of the employment protection legislation reforms that have been introduced in Italy since 1997. European Union institutions and domestic reformers advocated the reforms in order to increase the competitiveness and productivity of the Italian economy. Yet, by incentivising temporary employment, the reforms have favoured competitive strategies that have reduced the productivity of the country’s firms.KEYWORDS: Atypical workEU employment policylabour flexibilityEU labour market reformslabour market deregulationproductivitystructural reformstemporary employment Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. See Afonso et al. (Citation2021); Perez and Matsaganis (Citation2019); Picot and Tassinari (Citation2017); Rathgeb and Tassinari (Citation2022); Zartaloudis and Kornelakis (Citation2017).2. https://data.oecd.org/emp/temporary-employment.htm (accessed September 16, 2022)3. See Barbieri et al. (Citation2019); Berton, Richiardi and Sacchi (Citation2012); Ferrera and Gualmini (Citation2005); Rutherford and Frangi (Citation2018); Sacchi (Citation2018)4. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_OV (accessed July 5, 2022)5. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_T (accessed July 5, 2022)6. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsq_etpga/default/table?lang=en (accessed June 21, 2022)7. See http://www.prisma-statement.org.8. Saltari and Travaglini (Citation2008) do not report a coefficient, but do report no impact on productivity from regulatory change. We counted this as one test, no impact.9. One article (Cappellari, Dell’aringa & Leonardi Citation2012) measures productivity in three ways: valued added per workers, sales per worker, and TFP. In Table 1c, we have added together the tests measuring valued added per workers and sales per worker.10. We have also performed a non-parametric t-test, the Wilcoxon one-sample t-test for the median, which does not depend on normality assumptions on the distribution of the observations, for the 10 sources that adopt productivity as their dependent variable and share of temporary or permanent workers in the workforce as independent variable. A one-sided test indicates that rmedian is negative, with p value < 0.001.11. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tipslm20/default/table?lang=en accessed April 30, 2021Additional informationNotes on contributorsFrancesco StolfiFrancesco Stolfi is a Senior Lecturer in the Macquarie School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University. His current research studies the distributive conflict surrounding the regulation of professions and occupations. He is currently completing a research project comparing the remuneration rules for physicians in Australia and Canada. His research has appeared in journals such as Comparative European Politics, Governance, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Public Policy, Public Administration and Review of International Political Economy.Oliver FritschDr Oliver Fritsch is a Senior Lecturer at the Sir Walter Murdoch School of Public Policy and International Affairs, Murdoch University, Australia. He specialises in environmental policy and politics. Research areas include cost-benefit analysis and environmental analysis, public participation and stakeholder involvement, as well as transboundary problems. He also maintains a strong interest in regulatory impact assessment and other forms of ex-ante policy appraisal, and in applications of meta-analyses in political science and public policy.","PeriodicalId":47304,"journal":{"name":"South European Society and Politics","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"More flexible, less productive? The impact of employment protection legislation reforms in Italy\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Stolfi, Oliver Fritsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13608746.2023.2238970\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTThrough a meta-analysis of all publicly available research over a span of 25 years, the article assesses the productivity impact of the employment protection legislation reforms that have been introduced in Italy since 1997. European Union institutions and domestic reformers advocated the reforms in order to increase the competitiveness and productivity of the Italian economy. Yet, by incentivising temporary employment, the reforms have favoured competitive strategies that have reduced the productivity of the country’s firms.KEYWORDS: Atypical workEU employment policylabour flexibilityEU labour market reformslabour market deregulationproductivitystructural reformstemporary employment Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. See Afonso et al. (Citation2021); Perez and Matsaganis (Citation2019); Picot and Tassinari (Citation2017); Rathgeb and Tassinari (Citation2022); Zartaloudis and Kornelakis (Citation2017).2. https://data.oecd.org/emp/temporary-employment.htm (accessed September 16, 2022)3. See Barbieri et al. (Citation2019); Berton, Richiardi and Sacchi (Citation2012); Ferrera and Gualmini (Citation2005); Rutherford and Frangi (Citation2018); Sacchi (Citation2018)4. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_OV (accessed July 5, 2022)5. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_T (accessed July 5, 2022)6. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsq_etpga/default/table?lang=en (accessed June 21, 2022)7. See http://www.prisma-statement.org.8. Saltari and Travaglini (Citation2008) do not report a coefficient, but do report no impact on productivity from regulatory change. We counted this as one test, no impact.9. One article (Cappellari, Dell’aringa & Leonardi Citation2012) measures productivity in three ways: valued added per workers, sales per worker, and TFP. In Table 1c, we have added together the tests measuring valued added per workers and sales per worker.10. We have also performed a non-parametric t-test, the Wilcoxon one-sample t-test for the median, which does not depend on normality assumptions on the distribution of the observations, for the 10 sources that adopt productivity as their dependent variable and share of temporary or permanent workers in the workforce as independent variable. A one-sided test indicates that rmedian is negative, with p value < 0.001.11. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tipslm20/default/table?lang=en accessed April 30, 2021Additional informationNotes on contributorsFrancesco StolfiFrancesco Stolfi is a Senior Lecturer in the Macquarie School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University. His current research studies the distributive conflict surrounding the regulation of professions and occupations. He is currently completing a research project comparing the remuneration rules for physicians in Australia and Canada. His research has appeared in journals such as Comparative European Politics, Governance, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Public Policy, Public Administration and Review of International Political Economy.Oliver FritschDr Oliver Fritsch is a Senior Lecturer at the Sir Walter Murdoch School of Public Policy and International Affairs, Murdoch University, Australia. He specialises in environmental policy and politics. Research areas include cost-benefit analysis and environmental analysis, public participation and stakeholder involvement, as well as transboundary problems. He also maintains a strong interest in regulatory impact assessment and other forms of ex-ante policy appraisal, and in applications of meta-analyses in political science and public policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47304,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South European Society and Politics\",\"volume\":\"102 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South European Society and Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2023.2238970\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South European Society and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2023.2238970","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要通过对25年来所有公开研究的荟萃分析,本文评估了自1997年以来意大利引入的就业保护立法改革对生产率的影响。欧盟机构和国内改革者主张进行改革,以提高意大利经济的竞争力和生产力。然而,通过鼓励临时就业,改革有利于降低国家企业生产率的竞争战略。关键词:非典型劳动力、欧盟就业政策、劳动力灵活性、欧盟劳动力市场改革、劳动力市场放松管制、生产率、结构性改革、临时性就业披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。参见Afonso等人(Citation2021);Perez和Matsaganis (Citation2019);Picot and Tassinari (citation);Rathgeb and Tassinari (Citation2022);扎塔卢迪斯和科尔内拉基斯(Citation2017)https://data.oecd.org/emp/temporary-employment.htm(2022年9月16日访问)参见Barbieri et al. (Citation2019);Berton, Richiardi and Sacchi (citation);费雷拉和高米尼(Citation2005);Rutherford and Frangi (Citation2018);萨基(Citation2018) 4。https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_OV(2022年7月5日访问)https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_T(2022年7月5日访问)https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsq_etpga/default/table?lang=en(2022年6月21日访问)见http://www.prisma-statement.org.8。Saltari和Travaglini (Citation2008)没有报告一个系数,但是没有报告监管变化对生产率的影响。我们把这算一次测试,没有影响。一篇文章(Cappellari, Dell 'aringa & Leonardi Citation2012)用三种方式衡量生产率:每个工人的增加值,每个工人的销售额和TFP。在表1c中,我们将测量每个工人的增加值和每个工人的销售额的测试加在一起。我们还进行了非参数t检验,即对中位数的Wilcoxon单样本t检验,该检验不依赖于对观察值分布的正态性假设,对于采用生产率作为因变量,临时或永久工人在劳动力中所占比例作为自变量的10个来源。单侧检验表明rmedian为负,p值< 0.001.11。作者简介francesco Stolfi是麦考瑞大学麦考瑞社会科学学院的高级讲师。他目前的研究是围绕专业和职业监管的分配冲突。他目前正在完成一项比较澳大利亚和加拿大医生薪酬规则的研究项目。他的研究成果发表在《比较欧洲政治》、《治理》、《欧洲公共政策杂志》、《公共政策杂志》、《公共管理》和《国际政治经济学评论》等期刊上。Oliver Fritsch博士是澳大利亚默多克大学沃尔特•默多克爵士公共政策与国际事务学院的高级讲师。他专门研究环境政策和政治。研究领域包括成本效益分析和环境分析,公众参与和利益相关者的参与,以及跨界问题。他还对监管影响评估和其他形式的事前政策评估,以及在政治学和公共政策中的元分析应用保持着浓厚的兴趣。
More flexible, less productive? The impact of employment protection legislation reforms in Italy
ABSTRACTThrough a meta-analysis of all publicly available research over a span of 25 years, the article assesses the productivity impact of the employment protection legislation reforms that have been introduced in Italy since 1997. European Union institutions and domestic reformers advocated the reforms in order to increase the competitiveness and productivity of the Italian economy. Yet, by incentivising temporary employment, the reforms have favoured competitive strategies that have reduced the productivity of the country’s firms.KEYWORDS: Atypical workEU employment policylabour flexibilityEU labour market reformslabour market deregulationproductivitystructural reformstemporary employment Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. See Afonso et al. (Citation2021); Perez and Matsaganis (Citation2019); Picot and Tassinari (Citation2017); Rathgeb and Tassinari (Citation2022); Zartaloudis and Kornelakis (Citation2017).2. https://data.oecd.org/emp/temporary-employment.htm (accessed September 16, 2022)3. See Barbieri et al. (Citation2019); Berton, Richiardi and Sacchi (Citation2012); Ferrera and Gualmini (Citation2005); Rutherford and Frangi (Citation2018); Sacchi (Citation2018)4. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_OV (accessed July 5, 2022)5. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=EPL_T (accessed July 5, 2022)6. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsq_etpga/default/table?lang=en (accessed June 21, 2022)7. See http://www.prisma-statement.org.8. Saltari and Travaglini (Citation2008) do not report a coefficient, but do report no impact on productivity from regulatory change. We counted this as one test, no impact.9. One article (Cappellari, Dell’aringa & Leonardi Citation2012) measures productivity in three ways: valued added per workers, sales per worker, and TFP. In Table 1c, we have added together the tests measuring valued added per workers and sales per worker.10. We have also performed a non-parametric t-test, the Wilcoxon one-sample t-test for the median, which does not depend on normality assumptions on the distribution of the observations, for the 10 sources that adopt productivity as their dependent variable and share of temporary or permanent workers in the workforce as independent variable. A one-sided test indicates that rmedian is negative, with p value < 0.001.11. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tipslm20/default/table?lang=en accessed April 30, 2021Additional informationNotes on contributorsFrancesco StolfiFrancesco Stolfi is a Senior Lecturer in the Macquarie School of Social Sciences, Macquarie University. His current research studies the distributive conflict surrounding the regulation of professions and occupations. He is currently completing a research project comparing the remuneration rules for physicians in Australia and Canada. His research has appeared in journals such as Comparative European Politics, Governance, Journal of European Public Policy, Journal of Public Policy, Public Administration and Review of International Political Economy.Oliver FritschDr Oliver Fritsch is a Senior Lecturer at the Sir Walter Murdoch School of Public Policy and International Affairs, Murdoch University, Australia. He specialises in environmental policy and politics. Research areas include cost-benefit analysis and environmental analysis, public participation and stakeholder involvement, as well as transboundary problems. He also maintains a strong interest in regulatory impact assessment and other forms of ex-ante policy appraisal, and in applications of meta-analyses in political science and public policy.
期刊介绍:
A leading point of reference for scholars of Southern Europe, South European Society and Politics promotes both comparative and inter-disciplinary analyses, as well as offering innovative single county and sub-national studies. The journal acts as a forum for social, economic, cultural, contemporary historical and political approaches to research on the region, and is particularly keen to sponsor policy–focused studies in all these disciplines. The journal publishes research articles; South European Atlas with election reports and articles on other subjects of topical interest, and an extensive book reviews section, including both review articles and individual book reviews.