IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/japmet/v40y2025i6p591-607.html

A Random Forest–Based Panel Data Approach for Program Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Guannan Liu
  • Wei Long
  • Xuehong Luo

Abstract

It is challenging to conduct controlled experiments to assess the impacts of social policy. To address this, past studies propose a panel data approach using factor models to estimate average treatment effects. The selection of control units is a critical step to balance the goodness of fit within‐sample with the posttreatment forecasting error when the number of observed potential control units is large. In this study, we propose using random forests, an ensemble learning method, which offers robustness and requires fewer candidate models compared to existing methods. We demonstrate that our approach effectively selects almost all relevant control units, and we provide asymptotic normality results under the null of no average treatment effect and significance tests for policy interventions. Extensive simulations confirm the method's superior performance. In the empirical studies, we showcase the usefulness of the method by evaluating the impact of Brexit on the United Kingdom's GDP growth and China's anti‐corruption campaign on the importation of luxury watches.

Suggested Citation

  • Guannan Liu & Wei Long & Xuehong Luo, 2025. "A Random Forest–Based Panel Data Approach for Program Evaluation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(6), pages 591-607, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:japmet:v:40:y:2025:i:6:p:591-607
    DOI: 10.1002/jae.3123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.3123
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/jae.3123?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kathleen T. Li, 2020. "Statistical Inference for Average Treatment Effects Estimated by Synthetic Control Methods," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 115(532), pages 2068-2083, December.
    2. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    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. Chen, Qiang & Xiao, Zhijie & Yao, Qingsong, 2025. "Quantile control via random forest," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 249(PA).
    2. Vivek F. Farias & Andrew A. Li & Tianyi Peng, 2021. "Learning Treatment Effects in Panels with General Intervention Patterns," Papers 2106.02780, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    3. Lechner, Michael, 2018. "Modified Causal Forests for Estimating Heterogeneous Causal Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 12040, IZA Network @ LISER.
    4. William Arbour, 2021. "Can Recidivism be Prevented from Behind Bars? Evidence from a Behavioral Program," Working Papers tecipa-683, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    5. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, December.
    6. Justin Whitehouse & Qizhao Chen & Morgane Austern & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2025. "Inference on Optimal Policy Values and Other Irregular Functionals via Softmax Smoothing," Papers 2507.11780, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    7. Jonne Y. Guyt & Arjen van Lin & Kristopher O. Keller, 2025. "Banning Unsolicited Store Flyers: Does Helping the Environment Hurt Retailing?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 1104-1124, September.
    8. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Keola, Souknilanh & Silaphet, Korrakoun & Yamanouchi, Kenta, 2022. "Estimating the impacts of international bridges on foreign firm locations: a machine learning approach," IDE Discussion Papers 847, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    9. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2019. "Synthetic learner: model-free inference on treatments over time," Papers 1904.01490, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    10. Naguib, Costanza, 2019. "Estimating the Heterogeneous Impact of the Free Movement of Persons on Relative Wage Mobility," Economics Working Paper Series 1903, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    11. Labro, Eva & Lang, Mark & Omartian, James D., 2023. "Predictive analytics and centralization of authority," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1).
    12. Wu, Libo & Zhou, Yang, 2025. "Social norms and energy conservation in China," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    13. Frondel, Manuel & Kussel, Gerhard & Sommer, Stephan & Vance, Colin, 2019. "Local cost for global benefit: The case of wind turbines," Ruhr Economic Papers 791, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen, revised 2019.
    14. Patrick Krennmair & Timo Schmid, 2022. "Flexible domain prediction using mixed effects random forests," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1865-1894, November.
    15. Eliaz, Kfir & Spiegler, Ran, 2022. "On incentive-compatible estimators," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 204-220.
    16. Piasenti, Stefano & Valente, Marica & van Veldhuizen, Roel & Pfeifer, Gregor, 2023. "Does Unfairness Hurt Women? The Effects of Losing Unfair Competitions," IZA Discussion Papers 16324, IZA Network @ LISER.
    17. Elek, Péter & Bíró, Anikó, 2021. "Regional differences in diabetes across Europe – regression and causal forest analyses," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    18. Montiel Olea, José Luis & Nesbit, James, 2021. "(Machine) learning parameter regions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 716-744.
    19. Kyle Colangelo & Ying-Ying Lee, 2019. "Double debiased machine learning nonparametric inference with continuous treatments," CeMMAP working papers CWP54/19, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    20. Bokelmann, Björn & Lessmann, Stefan, 2024. "Improving uplift model evaluation on randomized controlled trial data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 691-707.

    More about this item

    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:wly:japmet:v:40:y:2025:i:6:p:591-607. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0883-7252/ .

    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.