CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 155Social and Economic SolidaritySocial Sciences and GovernanceEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bridges into Work? An Evaluation of Local Exchange and Trading Schemes (LETS)

Williams, Colin C., Aldridge, Theresa, Lee, Roger, Leyshon, Andrew, Thrift, Nigel, Tooke, Jane·2001·Policy Studies
DOI 10.1080/01442870127252
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Recently, the policy community has been paying particular attention to Local Exchange and Trading Schemes (LETS) as potential bridges into work for the unemployed. Up until now, however, there has only been piecemeal evidence on whether LETS are effective in this regard. In this paper, therefore, the full results of the first comprehensive evaluation of LETS are reported. In order to feed into the 'evidence-based policy-making' process, we evaluate whether LETS are effective first, as bridges into employment, second, as bridges into self-employment and, third and finally, at building reciprocal exchange networks. Our finding is that although LETS provide an indirect bridge into employment by improving employability, they are most effective as seedbeds for the development of self-employed business ventures and as vehicles for facilitating exchange beyond employment. For LETS to become more effective bridges into work for a wider range of the unemployed, nevertheless, a number of barriers to participation need to be tackled. The paper concludes by outlining how this could be achieved.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01442870127252

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. BARNKS H., 1996, LETS and Low Income
  2. 1998, Community-based Regeneration Initiatives: A Working Paper
  3. 1999, Jobs for All: National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal PAT1
  4. FITZPATRICK T., Greening the Welfare State
  5. 1999, Community Self-help: PAT9
  6. LANG P., 1994, LETS Work Revitalising the Local Economy
  7. WILLIAMS C. C., 1996, Employment and Society, 10, 341, 10.1177/0950017096102007 · DOI
  8. WILLIAMS C. C., 1997, International Journal of Community Currencies Research, 1, 32
  9. WILLIAMS C. C., 1999, A Helping Hand: Harnessing Self-help to Combat Social Exclusion

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–155 of 155

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Williams, C. C., Aldridge, T., Lee, R., Leyshon, A., Thrift, N., & Tooke, J.
ORCID
Venue
Policy Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2001-06
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
119-132
ISSN
  • 0144-2872 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1006
DOI
10.1080/01442870127252
OpenAlex
W1971534869
Cited by
155
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 5
FWCI
35.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Policy Studies (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Economic Solidarity
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Social Sciences and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Keywords
LETS, unemployed people, employment, self-employment, employability, barriers to participation, social economy, evidence-based policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review