IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/dsug04/7.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conditional logit versus random coefficient models: An analysis using GLLAMM

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Haan

    (DIW)

Abstract

Estimating labor supply functions using a discrete rather than a continuous specification has become increasingly popular in recent years. The main advantage of the discrete choice approach compared to continuous specifications derives from the possibility to model nonlinearities in budget functions. However, the standard discrete choice approach, the conditional logit model, is based on some restrictive assumptions. Econometric literature has suggested more general discrete choice models. However, these less restrictive specifications have shown to incur very high computational cost, which might obstruct the estimation of confidence intervals of marginal effects or elasticities. It is therefore of particular interest for applied research, which approach is more adequate when analyzing discrete choice models. In my analysis, I estimate different model specifications of a household utility function drawing on micro data of the GSOEP. For the estimation, I employ the Stata program GLLAMM, developed by Sophia Rabe-Hesketh et al. (2001). The idea is to test whether the results derived from the different specifications differ significantly. My findings suggest that for computational reasons, standard discrete choice models that are more restrictive in their assumptions regarding error variances, seem to represent the adequate model choice for the analysis of labor supply functions on basis of the GSOEP.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Haan, "undated". "Conditional logit versus random coefficient models: An analysis using GLLAMM," German Stata Users' Group Meetings 2004 7, Stata Users Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:boc:dsug04:7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.stata.com/meeting/2german/Haan.pdf
    File Function: Presentation slides
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
    2. Gustafsson, Siv, 1992. "Separate Taxation and Married Women's Labor Supply: A Comparison of West Germany and Sweden," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 5(1), pages 61-85, February.
    3. Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Julian McCrae & Costas Meghir, 2000. "The labour market impact of the working families’ tax credit," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 75-103, March.
    4. Laisney, François & Beninger, Denis & Beblo, Miriam, 2003. "Family Tax Splitting: A Microsimulation of its Potential Labour Supply and Intra-household Welfare Effects in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-32, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    6. O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), 1999. "Handbook of Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    7. Bonin, Holger & Kempe, Wolfram & Schneider, Hilmar, 2002. "Household Labor Supply Effects of Low-Wage Subsidies in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 637, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Anders Skrondal & Andrew Pickles, 2004. "GLLAMM Manual," U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1160, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    9. Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Anders Skrondal & Andrew Pickles, 2002. "Reliable estimation of generalized linear mixed models using adaptive quadrature," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(1), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    11. Gerfin, Michael & Leu, Robert E., 2003. "The Impact of In-Work Benefits on Poverty and Household Labour Supply: A Simulation Study for Switzerland," IZA Discussion Papers 762, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    13. Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2004. "Household Taxation, Income Splitting and Labor Supply Incentives – A Microsimulation Study for Germany," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 50(3), pages 541-568.
    14. Arthur van Soest, 1995. "Structural Models of Family Labor Supply: A Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(1), pages 63-88.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter Haan, 2004. "Discrete Choice Labor Supply: Conditional Logit vs. Random Coefficient Models," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 394, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Olivier Bargain, 2004. "On modeling household labor supply with taxation," DELTA Working Papers 2004-14, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
    3. Kabátek, Jan, 2015. "Essays on public policy and household decision making," Other publications TiSEM 8cdb178e-ad98-42e5-a7e1-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Buhlmann, Florian & Hebsaker, Michael & Kreuz, Tobias & Schmidhäuser, Jakob & Siegloch, Sebastian & Stichnoth, Holger, 2022. "ZEW-EviSTA: A microsimulation model of the German tax and transfer system," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-026, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Bessho, Shun-ichiro & Hayashi, Masayoshi, 2014. "Intensive margins, extensive margins, and spousal allowances in the Japanese system of personal income taxes: A discrete choice analysis," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 162-178.
    6. Bernard Fortin & Nicolas Jacquemet & Bruce Shearer, 2008. "Policy Analysis in Health-Services Market: Accounting for Quality and Quantity," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 91-92, pages 293-319.
    7. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    8. Peter Haan, 2005. "State Dependence and Female Labor Supply in Germany: The Extensive and the Intensive Margin," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 538, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Peter Haan, 2006. "Much ado about nothing: conditional logit vs. random coefficient models for estimating labour supply elasticities," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 251-256.
    10. Clauss, Markus & Schnabel, Reinhold, 2008. "Distributional and behavioural effects of the German labour market reform," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 41(4), pages 431-446.
    11. Loeffler, Max & Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Siegloch, Sebastian & Sommer, Eric, 2014. "Documentation IZA?MOD v3.0: The IZA Policy Simulation Model," IZA Discussion Papers 8553, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2012. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US: New Results," Working Papers halshs-00805736, HAL.
    13. Tibor Paul Hanappi & Sandra Müllbacher, 2016. "Tax incentives and family labor supply in Austria," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 961-987, December.
    14. Peter Haan, 2006. "Slowly, but Changing: How Does Genuine State Dependence Affect Female Labor Supply on the Extensive and Intensive Margin," JEPS Working Papers 06-002, JEPS.
    15. Maximilian Joseph Blömer & Andreas Peichl, 2020. "The ifo Tax and Transfer Behavioral Microsimulation Model," ifo Working Paper Series 335, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    16. Patricia Apps & Jan Kabátek & Ray Rees & Arthur Soest, 2016. "Labor supply heterogeneity and demand for child care of mothers with young children," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 1641-1677, December.
    17. Denis Beninger & Holger Bonin & Julia Horstschräer & Grit Mühler, 2010. "Wirkungen eines Betreuungsgeldes bei bedarfsgerechtem Ausbau frühkindlicher Kindertagesbetreuung: eine Mikrosimulationsstudie," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(3), pages 147-168.
    18. Shun-ichiro Bessho & Masayoshi Hayashi, 2015. "Should the Japanese tax system be more progressive? An evaluation using the simulated SMCFs based on the discrete choice model of labor supply," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(1), pages 144-175, February.
    19. Daniele Pacifico, 2014. "On the role of unobserved preference Heterogeneity in discrete choice Models of labour supply," Working Papers 6, Department of the Treasury, Ministry of the Economy and of Finance.
    20. Geyer, Johannes & Haan, Peter & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2015. "The effects of family policy on maternal labor supply: Combining evidence from a structural model and a quasi-experimental approach," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 84-98.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:boc:dsug04:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.