IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/quante/v8y2017i2p367-396.html

Tolerating defiance? Local average treatment effects without monotonicity

Author

Listed:
  • Clément de Chaisemartin

Abstract

Instrumental variables (IVs) are commonly used to estimate the effects of some treatments. A valid IV should be as good as randomly assigned, it should not have a direct effect on the outcome, and it should not induce any unit to forgo treatment. This last condition, the so‐called monotonicity condition, is often implausible. This paper starts by showing that actually, IVs are still valid under a weaker condition than monotonicity. It then derives conditions that are sufficient for this weaker condition to hold and whose plausibility can easily be assessed in applications. It finally reviews several applications where this weaker condition is applicable while monotonicity is not. Overall, this paper extends the applicability of the IV estimation method.

Suggested Citation

  • Clément de Chaisemartin, 2017. "Tolerating defiance? Local average treatment effects without monotonicity," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(2), pages 367-396, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:quante:v:8:y:2017:i:2:p:367-396
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation

    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:quante:v:8:y:2017:i:2:p:367-396. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.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.