Files
Abstract
I denne studien undersøker vi langtidseffektene av å redusere maksimal varighet for arbeidsavklaringspenger (AAP) fra fire til tre år, en endring som ble innført i 2018. Studien bygger videre på Myhre og Kann (2022) ved å følge AAP-mottakere i nærmere åtte år etter innvilgelse. Vi sammenligner personer som fikk innvilget AAP i januar 2018 (med tre års makstid) med en tilsvarende kontrollgruppe som fikk AAP i desember 2017 (med fire års makstid). Målet er å vurdere om en kortere makstid fører til andre avklaringsforløp og varige forskjeller i arbeidsdeltakelse og mottak av trygdeytelser. Resultatene viser markante forskjeller mellom AAP-mottakere som kommer fra sykepenger og de som går direkte inn på AAP. For de med forutgående sykepengeforløp bidrar tre års makstid til raskere avklaring, lavere samlet trygdebruk og noe høyere arbeidsdeltakelse og arbeidsinntekt. Selv om overgang til uføretrygd skjer tidligere, skjer dette i større grad som gradert uføretrygd, som åpner for kombinasjon av arbeid og trygd. På lang sikt er nivåforskjellene mellom gruppene små, noe som tyder på at reformen primært fremskyndet tidspunktet for avklaring snarere enn å endre sluttutfallet. For mottakere som går direkte inn på AAP er effektene mindre gunstige. Kortere makstid gir en klart høyere risiko for varig uføretrygd uten en tilsvarende reduksjon i andelen som mottar AAP. Selv om arbeidsdeltakelsen øker noe på kort sikt, så vedvarer ikke denne effekten på lengre sikt. Funnene indikerer at tre år er for kort for mottakere som starter avklaringsprosessen med AAP, og har svak eller ustabil arbeidstilknytning og større behov for behandling, aktivitet og kvalifisering. Samlet viser studien at kortere makstid i hovedsak virket etter intensjonen for mottakere med et sykepengeforløp før de kom inn på AAP, mens effektene for de som kom direkte inn på AAP i mindre grad var hensiktsmessige. Etter regelendringene i juli 2022, med opphevet karens og bredere adgang til forlengelser, er det imidlertid åpnet for mer fleksible og individuelt tilpassede avklaringsløp. Dette kan ha redusert noe av virkningen av den faste treårsrammen.
In this article, we examine long term effects of reducing the maximum duration of Work Assessment Allowance (AAP) from four to three years, which was changed in 2018. The study extends Myhre and Kann (2022) by following AAP recipients for almost eight years after entry. We compare individuals allowed AAP in January 2018 (maximum duration three years) with a comparable control group granted AAP in December 2017 (maximum duration four years). The aim is to assess whether a shorter maximum duration leads to different assessment trajectories and persistent differences in employment and benefit receipt. The results reveal marked differences between recipients who entered AAP from sickness benefits and those who entered AAP directly. For recipients with a preceding sickness-benefit spell, we find that a shorter maximum duration accelerates resolution, decreases overall benefit receipt and somewhat increases recipients’ employment and earnings. Although transitions to disability benefits occur earlier, they more often take the form of partial disability benefits, which facilitates combining work and benefits. In the long run, level differences between the groups are small, suggesting that the reform mainly shifted the timing of resolution rather than changing the eventual outcome. For recipients who entered AAP directly, the effects are less favorable. A shorter maximum duration clearly increases the risk of permanent disability benefit receipt. While a higher share is employed in the short run, this effect does not persist in the long run. These findings indicate that a three-year maximum duration is too short for recipients who begin the assessment process directly on AAP and who have weak or unstable attachment to the labour market, as well as greater needs for treatment, activity, and qualification. Overall, the study shows that a shorter maximum duration largely worked as intended for recipients who had a sickness-benefit spell before entering AAP, whereas effects for those entering AAP directly were less desirable. Following the regulatory changes introduced in July 2022—removing the waiting period and expanding the grounds for extensions—the AAP system now allows for more flexible and individually tailored assessment trajectories. These changes may have reduced some of the impact of the fixed three-year limit.
In this article, we examine long term effects of reducing the maximum duration of Work Assessment Allowance (AAP) from four to three years, which was changed in 2018. The study extends Myhre and Kann (2022) by following AAP recipients for almost eight years after entry. We compare individuals allowed AAP in January 2018 (maximum duration three years) with a comparable control group granted AAP in December 2017 (maximum duration four years). The aim is to assess whether a shorter maximum duration leads to different assessment trajectories and persistent differences in employment and benefit receipt. The results reveal marked differences between recipients who entered AAP from sickness benefits and those who entered AAP directly. For recipients with a preceding sickness-benefit spell, we find that a shorter maximum duration accelerates resolution, decreases overall benefit receipt and somewhat increases recipients’ employment and earnings. Although transitions to disability benefits occur earlier, they more often take the form of partial disability benefits, which facilitates combining work and benefits. In the long run, level differences between the groups are small, suggesting that the reform mainly shifted the timing of resolution rather than changing the eventual outcome. For recipients who entered AAP directly, the effects are less favorable. A shorter maximum duration clearly increases the risk of permanent disability benefit receipt. While a higher share is employed in the short run, this effect does not persist in the long run. These findings indicate that a three-year maximum duration is too short for recipients who begin the assessment process directly on AAP and who have weak or unstable attachment to the labour market, as well as greater needs for treatment, activity, and qualification. Overall, the study shows that a shorter maximum duration largely worked as intended for recipients who had a sickness-benefit spell before entering AAP, whereas effects for those entering AAP directly were less desirable. Following the regulatory changes introduced in July 2022—removing the waiting period and expanding the grounds for extensions—the AAP system now allows for more flexible and individually tailored assessment trajectories. These changes may have reduced some of the impact of the fixed three-year limit.