Article navigation

Argues that the high job mobility observed most prominently among workers in Japanese firms is consistent with the behaviour of risk‐averse individuals when neither private nor public income insurance is widely available to displaced workers. Laissez faire is suboptimal and involves higher job mobility than is socially optimal. Public provision of income insurance yields a Pareto improvement and reduces job rotation. Government job training schemes may push rotation levels even higher than the levels under laissez faire and could, therefore, be counterproductive.

You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Pay-Per-View Access
$39.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal