Discrete Choice Labor Supply: Conditional Logit vs. Random Coefficient Models
Estimating labor supply functions using a discrete rather than a continuous specification has become increasingly popular in recent years. On basis of the German Socioeconomic Panel (GSOEP) I test which specification of discrete choice is the appropriate model for estimating labor supply: the standard conditional logit model or the random coefficient model. To the extent that effect heterogeneity is present in empirical models of labor supply functions, the application of a random coefficient model is necessary to avoid biased estimates. However, because of the complex structure, random coefficient models defy calculating confidence intervals of marginal effects or elasticities. Therefore, if heterogeneity is nonexistent or does not lead to a significant bias in the derived labor supply elasticities, standard discrete choice models provide the more favorable choice. Due to their simple structure, conditional logit models are far less computational intensive providing standard tools to calculate confidence intervals of elasticities. My findings suggest that effect heterogeneity is present when estimating a discrete choice model of labor supply drawing on data of the GSOEP. However, the labor supply elastisities derived form the specifications with and without random effects do not differ significantly. That leads to the conclusion that the standard discrete choice model, attractive for its simple structure, provides an adequate model choice for the analysis of labor supply functions based on the GSOEP.
|Date of creation:||2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.diw.de/en
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.:
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999.
"Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns,"
University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers
qt1j6814b3, University of California Transportation Center.
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3tb6j874, University of California Transportation Center.
- Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Anders Skrondal & Andrew Pickles, 2002. "Reliable estimation of generalized linear mixed models using adaptive quadrature," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(1), pages 1-21, February.
- Viktor Steiner & Katharina Wrohlich, 2004. "Household Taxation, Income Splitting and Labor Supply Incentives: A Microsimulation Study for Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 421, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
- Laisney, François & Beninger, Denis & Beblo, Miriam, 2003. "Family Tax Splitting: A Microsimulation of its Potential Labour Supply and Intra-household Welfare Effects in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-32, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
- Gerfin, Michael & Leu, Robert E., 2003.
"The Impact of In-Work Benefits on Poverty and Household Labour Supply: A Simulation Study for Switzerland,"
IZA Discussion Papers
762, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Michael Gerfin & Robert E. Leu, 2003. "The Impact of In-Work Benefits on Poverty and Household Labour Supply. A simulation study for Switzerland," Diskussionsschriften dp0304, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
- Bonin, Holger & Kempe, Wolfram & Schneider, Hilmar, 2002. "Household Labor Supply Effects of Low-Wage Subsidies in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 637, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2, March.
- Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Julian McCrae & Costas Meghir, 2000. "The labour market impact of the working families’ tax credit," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 75-103, March.
- Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
- Gustafsson, Siv, 1992. "Separate Taxation and Married Women's Labor Supply: A Comparison of West Germany and Sweden," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 61-85, February.
- Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
- Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Anders Skrondal & Andrew Pickles, 2004. "GLLAMM Manual," U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1160, Berkeley Electronic Press.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp394. 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: (Bibliothek)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.