PreprintCited by 187International Development and AidMicrofinance and Financial InclusionEducation and Labor Relations

Generating Employment in Poor and Fragile States: Evidence from Labor Market and Entrepreneurship Programs

Open access
Blattman, Christopher, Ralston, Laura·2015·SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract

The world's poor -- and programs to raise their incomes -- are increasingly concentrated in fragile states. We review the evidence on what interventions work, and whether stimulating employment promotes social stability. Skills training and microfinance have shown little impact on poverty or stability, especially relative to program cost. In contrast, injections of capital -- cash, capital goods, or livestock -- seem to stimulate self-employment and raise long term earning potential, often when partnered with low-cost complementary interventions. Such capital-centric programs, alongside cash-for-work, may be the most effective tools for putting people to work and boosting incomes in poor and fragile states. We argue that policymakers should shift the balance of programs in this direction. If targeted to the highest risk men, we should expect such programs to reduce crime and other materially-motivated violence modestly. Policymakers, however, should not expect dramatic effects of employment on crime and violence, in part because some forms of violence do not respond to incomes or employment. Finally, this review finds that more investigation is needed in several areas. First, are skills training and other interventions cost-effective complements to capital injections? Second, what non-employment strategies reduce crime and violence among the highest risk men, and are they complementary to employment programs? Third, policymakers can reduce the high failure rate of employment programs by using small-scale pilots before launching large programs; investing in labor market panel data; and investing in multi-country studies to test and fine tune the most promising interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.2622220

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Meta-analyses have pointed to low or short-lived returns to standalone vocational skills training programs in low-income settings.

    “Our intervention also builds on existing work examining the impacts of standalone vocational skills training programs, for which meta-analyses have pointed to low or short-lived returns in low-income settings”

    From Women's Empowerment in Action: Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial in Africa (2020) · cites this paper as Blattman and Ralston 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blattman, C., & Ralston, L.
Affiliations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
  • World Bank (US)
Corresponding author
Blattman, Christopher
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W850306832
Cited by
187
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2012: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Development › International Development and Aid
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Microfinance and Financial Inclusion
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Education and Labor Relations
Keywords
employment programs, fragile states, poverty reduction, self-employment, capital injection, cash for work, livestock, skills training, microfinance, entrepreneurship, crime and violence, social stability, program cost-effectiveness, labour market interventions, pilot project

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