Employing two widely used approaches to identify the effects of monetary policy, this paper explores the differential impact of policy on the labor market outcomes of teenagers, minorities, out-of-school youth, and less-skilled individuals. Evidence from recursive vector autoregressions and autoregressive distributed lag models that use information on the Federal Reserve's contractionary initiatives indicate that the employment-population ratio of minorities is more sensitive to contractionary monetary policy than that of whites. The ratio falls primarily because of an increase in unemployment and not because of a decline in labor force participation. Monetary policy appears to have a disproportionate effect on the unemployment rate of teenagers, particularly African American teenagers. Their employment-population ratios fall because of increased difficulty in obtaining employment. The larger responses are not caused by their higher likelihood of having been employed in industries and occupations that are more sensitive to contractionary monetary policy. © 2004 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management (JPAM) strives for quality, relevance, and originality. The editors give priority to articles that relate their conclusions broadly to a number of substantive fields of public policy or that deal with issues of professional practice in policy analysis and management. Although an interdisciplinary perspective is usually most appropriate, articles that employ the tools of a single discipline are welcome if they have substantive relevance and if they are written for a general, rather than disciplinary, audience. The editors welcome proposals for articles that review the state of knowledge in particular policy areas. JPAM welcomes unsolicited manuscripts from all sources. Potential contributors should prepare manuscripts with an awareness of the substantive goals and presentational styles of the following sections: Feature Articles, Point/Counterpoint, Professional Practice, Policy Retrospectives and Curriculum and Case Notes.
Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace. Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management
© 2004 Wiley