Suchergebnisse

In the absence of panel data, researchers have devised alternative methods for estimating synthetic poverty dynamics using repeated cross section surveys. These methods are not only salient in the absence of panel data, but also in contexts where there are concerns over the quality of panel data and/or the panel data are of insufficient length to analyse medium- to long-term mobility trends. Both of these issues afflict the longitudinal element of the European Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) (Hérault and Jenkins, J Econ Inequ 17(1):51–76, 2019). Using the longitudinal element of EU-SILC, this paper assesses the accuracy of the synthetic panel approach put forth by Dang and Lanjouw (2021). For most conventional poverty lines, the DL approach is found to be highly accurate when the true \(\rho \) is known. Similar to Hérault and Jenkins (J Econ Inequ 17(1):51-76, 2019) the pseudo-panel approach for estimating \(\rho \) is found to be highly sensitive to cohort definition. The longitudinal element of EU-SILC, however, offers a unique route for overcoming this shortcoming.

The Programme for Government indicated that under a Universal Health Insurance system, the State would "pay insurance premia for people on low incomes and subsidise premia for people on middle incomes". This paper examines issues in the design of such a subsidy scheme, in the context of overall premium costs as estimated by Wren et al. (2015) and the KPMG (2015) study for the Health Insurance Authority. Subsidy design could involve a step-level system, similar to the medical card and GP visit card in the current system; or a smooth, tapered withdrawal of the subsidy, similar to what obtains for many cash benefits in the welfare system. The trade-offs between the income limit up to which a full subsidy would be payable, the rate of withdrawal of subsidy with respect to extra income and overall subsidy cost are explored.

Vigorous debate over the effectiveness of the fiscal adjustment programmes for the crisis-stricken countries in the eurozone has grown quite polarised. In this Forum, several experts use analytical, evidence-based approaches to gauge the effectiveness of these programmes. The role played by the estimates of the fi scal multipliers that the Commission, IMF and ECB used to structure the adjustment programmes is crucial to this debate. If these multipliers were underestimated, as the IMF itself claims, then the negative impact of the fiscal restructuring on already fragile economies would also have been underestimated. Several authors examine the available evidence to determine whether the adjustments programmes were flawed from the outset. Another contribution analyses the effectiveness of structural reforms when monetary policy rates are near the zero lower bound. A final paper uses a case study of Ireland's recovery thus far to examine the actual effects that the programmes have had on the crisis-stricken countries' economies.