<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/64248">
    <title>EconStor Collection:</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/64248</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337433" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337435" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337437" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337434" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2026-04-28T16:12:02Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337433">
    <title>Unemployment, benefits and household spending: New evidence from UK bank account data</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337433</link>
    <description>Title: Unemployment, benefits and household spending: New evidence from UK bank account data
Authors: Delestre, Isaac; Waters, Tom
Abstract: The risk of a worker falling into unemployment represents one of the most important threats to the stability of households' finances - both in terms of lower spending (and hence living standards) and in terms of a greater degree of financial distress (such as the accumulation of unmanageable debt or missed bill payments). Providing households with some degree of insurance against these risks is a crucial function of benefit systems. However, relatively little is known about how spending and financial distress evolve following job loss in the UK and the role played by the benefit system - which, by international standards, provides comparatively little protection against unemployment, on average. Drawing on a dataset of anonymised bank account transactions, this report provides new evidence on how workers' finances respond to unemployment. Using a sample of more than 10,000 job losses occurring between 2018 and 2023, we trace changes to spending, credit usage and financial distress during unemployment, exploring how these responses vary according to the amount of support afforded by the benefit system.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337435">
    <title>The IFS Scottish Budget Report: 2026-27</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337435</link>
    <description>Title: The IFS Scottish Budget Report: 2026-27
Authors: Boileau, Bee; Brogaard, Martin; Phillips, David; Macpherson, Angus
Abstract: The Scottish Budget and Spending Review published on 13 January set detailed spending plans for 2026-27, alongside higher-level plans for the following two years for day-to-day (resource) spending and the following three years for investment (capital) spending. Understandably, the Scottish Government chose to highlight areas where it has chosen to spend more (such as the Scottish child payment) or tax less (such as increases in the basic- and intermediate-rate tax thresholds). But a significant slowdown in funding growth means that these decisions sit alongside tougher choices elsewhere. This report, building on our initial response to the Scottish Budget, looks in more detail at the spending plans set out. We will consider the funding situation (including funding risks), tax and benefit policy, and public service performance in a series of pre-election briefings to be published over the next two months.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337437">
    <title>From fiscal rules to fiscal traffic lights: Rethinking the UK fiscal framework</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337437</link>
    <description>Title: From fiscal rules to fiscal traffic lights: Rethinking the UK fiscal framework
Authors: Zaranko, Ben
Abstract: The central contention of this report is that the UK fiscal framework has some desirable features but is not delivering good outcomes. We are in a bad equilibrium. The UK's fiscal framework is based around a set of pass-fail, numerical fiscal rules. The fiscal debate is overly fixated on the amount of 'headroom' the government has against the most binding of those rules. The system incentivises the government to operate with the smallest amount of 'headroom' possible, with policy often fine-tuned according to the central point estimate of a highly uncertain forecast from the Office for Budget Responsibility. When the forecast improves, any additional 'headroom' is typically spent; when the forecast worsens, Chancellors of all political hues are adept at meeting the letter of the rolling fiscal targets by promising spending cuts or tax rises for future years - or the rules simply get changed. Put differently, the framework and the way it has come to be operated mean that when forecasts move around - as they inevitably do - policy has to respond, often in a rush and with a spurious degree of precision. This does not make for good policymaking, it does not ensure sustainable public finances, and it stretches credulity and credibility with financial markets. We are living through a tough fiscal moment, but it is hard to believe this is the best we can do. This report argues that the UK would be better served by a new framework based around a set of 'fiscal traffic lights', used to monitor performance against broad fiscal objectives and principles set out in a high-profile Statement of Fiscal Strategy at the start of each parliament. The overarching aim would be to create the conditions for better fiscal policymaking and a better fiscal debate while maintaining - or building - credibility with bond market investors. This is a proposal for the medium-to-long term, and not an argument for immediate reform. The current set-up has its shortcomings, but to abandon the current fiscal rules at the present moment would very likely be interpreted by financial markets merely as an attempt by the government to relax its fiscal constraints and borrow more - which is not the point of this proposal. Only from a position of strength and credibility - ideally having delivered a current and/or primary budget surplus - should such a change be considered. In the nearer term, a set of fiscal traffic lights could be developed and operated in parallel with the existing system over the remainder of this parliament, to iron out issues, build understanding, and facilitate a full transition at the point when the fiscal rules next come under review.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337434">
    <title>Career pathways between occupations in the English NHS</title>
    <link>https://hdl.handle.net/10419/337434</link>
    <description>Title: Career pathways between occupations in the English NHS
Authors: Harvey-Rich, Olly; Kelly, Elaine; Stockton, Isabel
Abstract: More than 1.5 million staff work for the NHS in England, across a wide range of occupations. Progression within these occupations - for example, from nurse to senior staff nurse - has long been a focus of workforce policy in the NHS. Transitions between broad occupation groups - such as healthcare assistants who train to become nurses - are less prominent, but have become increasingly common over time. For staff members, these transitions can provide important opportunities for career progression and development, whilst for NHS trusts they can be a valuable way to fill 'skills gaps' with staff they already know well. They might also be a way for the NHS to invest more in the skills and workforce of its local communities, an ambition emphasised in the recent '10 Year Health Plan for England'. However, there is little large-scale evidence to date on these types of transitions in the NHS, making it difficult to judge how far they can contribute to each of these goals. In this report, we use data from the Electronic Staff Record (ESR), the monthly payroll of the NHS, to set out which staff transition between which occupations, and how this has changed over time. We place a particular focus on transitions from clinical support occupations - such as healthcare assistants and nursing auxiliaries - to registered clinical occupations, such as nurses, midwives and physiotherapists. Recent governments have created new routes into nursing that have a particular policy focus on recruiting from clinical support roles into registered nursing roles, and these transitions are now a much bigger source of nurse recruitment. However, they remain much more common in some NHS trust types and some parts of the country. We analyse how the local labour market might affect the frequency of these transitions and discuss the implications for future workforce policy.</description>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

