Characterizing the Instrumental Variable Identifying Assumption as Sample Selection Conditions
AbstractWe build on Rosenzweig and Wolpin (2000) and Keane (2010) and show that in order to ful ll the Instrumental variable (IV) identifying moment condition, a policy must be designed so that compliers and non-compliers either have the same average error term, or have an error term ratio equal to their relative share of the population. The former condition (labeled Choice Orthogonality) is essentially a no-selection condition. The latter one, referred to as Weighted Opposite Choices, may be viewed as a distributional (functional form) assumption necessary to match the degree of selectivity between compliers and noncompliers to their relative population proportions. Those conditions form a core of implicit IV assumptions that are present in any empirical applications. They allow the econometrician to gain substantial insight about the validity of a speci c instrument, and they illustrate the link between identi cation and the statistical strength of an instrument. Finally, our characterization may also help designing a policy generating a valid instrument.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by HAL in its series Working Papers with number hal-00753539.
Date of creation: 19 Nov 2012
Date of revision:
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00753539
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
Instrumental Variable methods; Implicit Assumptions; Treatment E ects.;
Other versions of this item:
- Belzil, Christian & Hansen, Jörgen, 2012. "Characterizing the Instrumental Variable Identifying Assumption as Sample Selection Conditions," IZA Discussion Papers 6339, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
- C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
- C3 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-12-06 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Heckman, James J, 1979.
"Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 153-61, January.
- James Heckman, 1997. "Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 441-462.
- Belzil, Christian, 2006.
"The Return to Schooling in Structural Dynamic Models: A Survey,"
IZA Discussion Papers
2370, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Belzil, Christian, 2007. "The return to schooling in structural dynamic models: a survey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 1059-1105, July.
- Christian Belzil, 2007. "The Return to Schooling in Structural Dynamic Models: A Survey," Post-Print halshs-00201230, HAL.
- Christian Belzil, 2006. "The Return to Schooling in Structural Dynamic Models: A Survey," Working Papers 0609, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique (GATE), Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Université Lyon 2, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
- Christian Belzil, 2006. "The Return to Schooling in Structural Dynamic Models: A Survey," Post-Print halshs-00142538, HAL.
- Edward Vytlacil, 2002. "Independence, Monotonicity, and Latent Index Models: An Equivalence Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 331-341, January.
- Joshua D. Angrist & Guido W. Imbens, 1995.
"Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects,"
NBER Technical Working Papers
0118, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Imbens, Guido W & Angrist, Joshua D, 1994. "Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 467-75, March.
- Christian Belzil & J. Hansen, 2010.
"The distinction between dictatorial and incentive policy interventions and its implication for IV estimation,"
- Belzil, Christian & Hansen, Jörgen, 2010. "The Distinction between Dictatorial and Incentive Policy Interventions and its Implication for IV Estimation," IZA Discussion Papers 4835, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Abbring, Jaap H. & Heckman, James J., 2007. "Econometric Evaluation of Social Programs, Part III: Distributional Treatment Effects, Dynamic Treatment Effects, Dynamic Discrete Choice, and General Equilibrium Policy Evaluation," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 72 Elsevier.
- Keane, Michael P., 2010. "Structural vs. atheoretic approaches to econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 3-20, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.