IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/emjrnl/v25y2022i2p477-493..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonparametric bounds on treatment effects with imperfect instruments
[Instrument-based estimation with binarized treatments: Issues and tests for the exclusion restriction]

Author

Listed:
  • Kyunghoon Ban
  • Désiré Kédagni

Abstract

SummaryThis paper extends the identification results in Nevo and Rosen (2012) to nonparametric models. We derive nonparametric bounds on the average treatment effect when an imperfect instrument is available. As in Nevo and Rosen (2012), we assume that the correlation between the imperfect instrument and the unobserved latent variables has the same sign as the correlation between the endogenous variable and the latent variables. We show that the monotone treatment selection and monotone instrumental variable restrictions, introduced by Manski and Pepper (2000; 2009), jointly imply this assumption. Moreover, we show how the monotone treatment response assumption can help tighten the bounds. The identified set can be written in the form of intersection bounds, which is more conducive to inference. We illustrate our methodology using the National Longitudinal Survey of Young Men data to estimate returns to schooling.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyunghoon Ban & Désiré Kédagni, 2022. "Nonparametric bounds on treatment effects with imperfect instruments [Instrument-based estimation with binarized treatments: Issues and tests for the exclusion restriction]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 477-493.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:emjrnl:v:25:y:2022:i:2:p:477-493.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ectj/utab033
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:emjrnl:v:25:y:2022:i:2:p:477-493.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.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.