Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 | Total: 4
We consider treatment-effect estimation under a parallel trends assumption, in heterogeneous adoption designs where no unit is treated at period one, and units receive a weakly positive dose at period two. First, we develop a test of the assumption that the treatment effect is mean independent of the treatment, under which the commonly-used two-way-fixed-effects estimator is consistent. When this test is rejected, we propose alternative, robust estimators. If there are stayers with a period-two treatment equal to 0, the robust estimator is a difference-in-differences (DID) estimator using stayers as the control group. If there are quasi-stayers with a period-two treatment arbitrarily close to zero, the robust estimator is a DID using units with a period-two treatment below a bandwidth as controls. Finally, without stayers or quasi-stayers, we propose non-parametric bounds, and an estimator relying on a parametric specification of treatment-effect heterogeneity. We use our results to revisit Pierce and Schott (2016) and Enikolopov et al. (2011).
Recent advances in the literature of decomposition methods in economics have allowed for the identification and estimation of detailed wage gap decompositions. In this context, building reliable counterfactuals requires using tighter controls to ensure that similar workers are correctly identified by making sure that important unobserved variables such as skills are controlled for, as well as comparing only workers with similar observable characteristics. This paper contributes to the wage decomposition literature in two main ways: (i) developing an economic principled network based approach to control for unobserved worker skills heterogeneity in the presence of potential discrimination; and (ii) extending existing generic decomposition tools to accommodate for potential lack of overlapping supports in covariates between groups being compared, which is likely to be the norm in more detailed decompositions. We illustrate the methodology by decomposing the gender wage gap in Brazil.
The past two decades have witnessed a surge of new research in the analysis of randomized experiments. The emergence of this literature may seem surprising given the widespread use and long history of experiments as the "gold standard" in program evaluation, but this body of work has revealed many subtle aspects of randomized experiments that may have been previously unappreciated. This article provides an overview of some of these topics, primarily focused on stratification, regression adjustment, and cluster randomization.
I propose a quantile-based nonadditive fixed effects panel model to study heterogeneous causal effects. Similar to standard fixed effects (FE) model, my model allows arbitrary dependence between regressors and unobserved heterogeneity, but it generalizes the additive separability of standard FE to allow the unobserved heterogeneity to enter nonseparably. Similar to structural quantile models, my model's random coefficient vector depends on an unobserved, scalar ''rank'' variable, in which outcomes (excluding an additive noise term) are monotonic at a particular value of the regressor vector, which is much weaker than the conventional monotonicity assumption that must hold at all possible values. This rank is assumed to be stable over time, which is often more economically plausible than the panel quantile studies that assume individual rank is iid over time. It uncovers the heterogeneous causal effects as functions of the rank variable. I provide identification and estimation results, establishing uniform consistency and uniform asymptotic normality of the heterogeneous causal effect function estimator. Simulations show reasonable finite-sample performance and show my model complements fixed effects quantile regression. Finally, I illustrate the proposed methods by examining the causal effect of a country's oil wealth on its military defense spending.