IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Sensitivity of Matching-Based Program Evaluations to the Availability of Control Variables

  • Michael Lechner
  • Conny Wunsch

Based on new, exceptionally informative and large German linked employer-employee administrative data, we investigate the question whether the omission of important control variables in matching estimation leads to biased impact estimates of typical active labour market programs for the unemployed. Such biases would lead to false policy conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of these expensive policies. Using newly developed Empirical Monte Carlo Study methods, we find that besides standard personal characteristics, information on individual health and firm characteristics of the last employer are particularly important for selection correction. Moreover, it is important to account for past performance on the labour market in a very detailed and flexible way. Information on job search behaviour, timing of unemployment and program start, as well as detailed regional characteristics are also relevant.

If 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.

File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/page/portal/DocBase_Content/WP/WP-CESifo_Working_Papers/wp-cesifo-2011/wp-cesifo-2011-03/cesifo1_wp3381.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CESifo Group Munich in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number 3381.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_3381
Contact details of provider: Postal: Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo.de
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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.:

as in new window
  1. Osikominu, Aderonke & Fitzenberger, Bernd & Völter, Robert, 2006. "Get Training or Wait? Long-Run Employment Effects of Training Programs for the Unemployed in West Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-39, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  2. Michael Lechner & Stephan Wiehler, 2011. "Kids or courses? Gender differences in the effects of active labor market policies," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 783-812, July.
  3. Michael Gerfin & Michael Lechner, 2002. "A Microeconometric Evaluation of the Active Labour Market Policy in Switzerland," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 854-893, October.
  4. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-140882 is not listed on IDEAS
  5. Petrongolo, Barbara, 2008. "The long-term effects of job search requirements: Evidence from the UK JSA reform," CEPR Discussion Papers 7067, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  6. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
  7. Martin Huber & Michael Lechner & Conny Wunsch, 2010. "How to control for many covariates? Reliable estimators based on the propensity score," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-30, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
  8. Card, David & Kluve, Jochen & Weber, Andrea, 2009. "Active Labor Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis," IZA Discussion Papers 4002, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  9. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2008. "Alternative approaches to evaluation in empirical microeconomics," CeMMAP working papers CWP26/08, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  10. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra, 1998. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 261-94, April.
  11. Fitzenberger, Bernd & Völter, Robert, 2007. "Long-Run Effects of Training Programs for the Unemployed in East Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 2630, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  12. Michael Lechner & Ruth Miquel & Conny Wunsch, 2011. "Long‐Run Effects Of Public Sector Sponsored Training In West Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 742-784, 08.
  13. Stephan Thomsen, 2009. "Job Search Assistance Programs in Europe: Evaluation Methods and Recent Empirical Findings," FEMM Working Papers 09018, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
  14. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2008. "On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1537-1557, November.
  15. Peter R. Mueser & Kenneth Troske & Alexey Gorislavsky, 2003. "Using State Administrative Data to Measure Program Performance," Working Papers 0309, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
  16. Frölich, Markus & Lechner, Michael, 2010. "Exploiting Regional Treatment Intensity for the Evaluation of Labor Market Policies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(491), pages 1014-1029.
  17. Abowd, John M. & Kramarz, Francis, 1999. "The analysis of labor markets using matched employer-employee data," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 40, pages 2629-2710 Elsevier.
  18. Michael Lechner & Ruth Miquel & Conny Wunsch, 2007. "The Curse and Blessing of Training the Unemployed in a Changing Economy: The Case of East Germany After Unification," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8, pages 468-509, November.
  19. van Ours, J.C., 2002. "The Locking-In Effect of Subsidized Jobs," Discussion Paper 2002-60, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  20. Heckman, James J. & Navarro, Salvador, 2003. "Using Matching, Instrumental Variables and Control Functions to Estimate Economic Choice Models," IZA Discussion Papers 768, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  21. Dehejia, R.H. & Wahba, S., 1998. "Propensity Score Matching Methods for Non-Experimental Causal Studies," Discussion Papers 1998_02, Columbia University, Department of Economics.
  22. Fitzenberger, Bernd & Speckesser, Stefan, 2005. "Employment Effects of the Provision of Specific Professional Skills and Techniques in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 1868, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  23. Friedlander, Daniel & Robins, Philip K, 1995. "Evaluating Program Evaluations: New Evidence on Commonly Used Nonexperimental Methods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 923-37, September.
  24. Joffe, Marshall M. & Ten Have, Thomas R. & Feldman, Harold I. & Kimmel, Stephen E., 2004. "Model Selection, Confounder Control, and Marginal Structural Models: Review and New Applications," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 58, pages 272-279, November.
  25. Conny Wunsch & Michael Lechner, 2008. "What Did All the Money Do? On the General Ineffectiveness of Recent West German Labour Market Programmes," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 134-174, 02.
  26. Fredriksson, Peter & Johansson, Per, 2002. "Program evaluation and random program starts," Working Paper Series 2003:1, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
  27. Shadish, William R. & Clark, M. H. & Steiner, Peter M., 2008. "Can Nonrandomized Experiments Yield Accurate Answers? A Randomized Experiment Comparing Random and Nonrandom Assignments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(484), pages 1334-1344.
  28. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1999. "The Pre-Program Earnings Dip and the Determinants of Participation in a Social Program: Implications for Simple Program Evaluation Strategies," NBER Working Papers 6983, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  29. Ahmed Khwaja & Gabriel Picone & Martin Salm & Justin G. Trogdon, 2011. "A comparison of treatment effects estimators using a structural model of AMI treatment choices and severity of illness information from hospital charts," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(5), pages 825-853, 08.
  30. Guido W. Imbens, 2003. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects under Exogeneity: A Review," NBER Technical Working Papers 0294, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  31. Dorsett, Richard, 2006. "The new deal for young people: effect on the labour market status of young men," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 405-422, June.
  32. JAMES G. MacKINNON, 2006. "Bootstrap Methods in Econometrics," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 82(s1), pages S2-S18, 09.
  33. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-20, September.
  34. van Ours, J.C., 2004. "The locking-in effect of subsidized jobs," Other publications TiSEM c4fd99a1-4c2f-46c6-9ee2-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  35. Sianesi, Barbara, 2008. "Differential effects of active labour market programs for the unemployed," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 370-399, June.
  36. Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 2003. "Does Matching Overcome Lalonde's Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?," University of Western Ontario, CIBC Centre for Human Capital and Productivity Working Papers 20035, University of Western Ontario, CIBC Centre for Human Capital and Productivity.
  37. Heckman, James J & Smith, Jeffrey A, 1999. "The Pre-programme Earnings Dip and the Determinants of Participation in a Social Programme. Implications for Simple Programme Evaluation Strategies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(457), pages 313-48, July.
  38. Michael Lechner & Conny Wunsch, 2009. "Active labour market policy in East Germany," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 17(4), pages 661-702, October.
  39. Peter R. Mueser & Carolyn J. Heinrich & Kenneth R. Troske & Kyung-Seong Jeon & Daver C. Kahvecioglu, 2010. "New Estimates of Public Employment and Training Program Net Impacts: A Nonexperimental Evaluation of the Workforce Investment Act Program," Working Papers 1003, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
  40. Barbara Sianesi, 2004. "An Evaluation of the Swedish System of Active Labor Market Programs in the 1990s," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 133-155, February.
  41. James J. Heckman, 1989. "Choosing Among Alternative Nonexperimental Methods for Estimating the Impact of Social Programs: The Case of Manpower Training," NBER Working Papers 2861, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  42. Thomas Fraker & Rebecca Maynard, 1987. "The Adequacy of Comparison Group Designs for Evaluations of Employment-Related Programs," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 22(2), pages 194-227.
  43. Heckman, James J & Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E, 1997. "Matching as an Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(4), pages 605-54, October.
  44. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, 01.
  45. Fredriksson, Peter & Johansson, Per, 2008. "Dynamic Treatment Assignment," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 26, pages 435-445.
  46. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," NBER Working Papers 6699, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  47. Dolton, Peter & Smith, Jeffrey A., 2011. "The Impact of the UK New Deal for Lone Parents on Benefit Receipt," IZA Discussion Papers 5491, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  48. Laura Larsson, 2003. "Evaluation of Swedish Youth Labor Market Programs," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(4).
  49. Jespersen, Svend T. & Munch, Jakob R. & Skipper, Lars, 2008. "Costs and benefits of Danish active labour market programmes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 859-884, October.
  50. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1995. "Assessing the Case for Social Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 85-110, Spring.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_3381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julio Saavedra)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.