Comparing Labor Force Attachment and Human Capital Development Models in America's Welfare to Work Policies

미국의 노동중심적 복지개혁에서의 '노동시장연결' 모델과 '인간자본개발' 모델 비교

The goals and strategies of welfare-to-work (WTW) policies have been sources of contentious political debate. In the United States, despite 20 years of welfare reform, there remain important differences of opinion regarding how best to design and deliver WTW programs. The proliferation of state and local WTW experiments has led to the identification of two ideal-types of WTW programs: the Labor Force Attachment and Human Capital Development models. Most of the recent policy debate about WTW in America has focused on the relative merits and performance of LFA and HCD. While the Primary goal of the LFA model is for welfare recipients to achieve a rapid transition into work, the HCD model seeks to improve the long-term employability of welfare dependents through education and skill development. LFA policies tend to be strongly outcome-oriented and generally can yield quick results. Their "any job is a good job" philosophy has proved attractive to policy-makers who are anxious to see concrete results in a short-term period. In contrast, the HCD policies do not simply dump welfare dependents at the bottom of the labor market, but aim to secure relatively stable and well-paid jobs. However, these strengths are offset by several practical weaknesses including high unit costs and long-term investment in human capital. In recent years, LFA policies have been increasingly favored by both policy officials and politicians in the United States. The introduction of Temporaray Assistance to Needy Families of 1996 has been accelerating the trend. What is going to happen to welfare recipients? This simple shift to the LFA model, however, will only see an alarming increase of working poor in a near future.