In view of Latvia’s volatile labour market, it does seem appropriate to maintain an ability for quickly scaling up public works programmes should the need arise. However, current allocations of Latvia’s limited ALMP resources should be based on a careful review of national and international evidence regarding the merits of public works programmes relative to other forms of ALMPs. On balance, the international evidence suggests that, while widely used as a redistributive tool and an effective employment buffer during crisis periods, public works programmes tend to have little to no positive effect on participants’ longer-term employment outcomes (Cahuc et al., Based on this evidence, Latvia probably devotes too large a share of the overall ALMP budget on public works programmes.