A fundamental identification problem in program evaluation arises when idiosyncratic gains from participation and the treatment decision depend on each other. Imbens and Angrist (1994) were the first to exploit a monotonicity condition in order to identify an average treatment effect parameter using instrumental variables. More recently, Heckman and Vytlacil (1999) suggested estimation of a variety of treatment effect parameters using a local version of their approach. However, identification hinges on the same monotonicity assumption that is fundamentally untestable. We investigate the sensitivity of respective estimates to reasonable departures from monotonicity that are likely to be encountered in practice and relate it to properties of a structural parameter. One of our results is that the bias vanishes under a testable linearity condition. Our findings are illustrated in a Monte Carlo analysis.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in its series IZA Discussion Papers with number
2738.
References listed on IDEAS 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.: