IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/rpdpjp/21001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regression Discontinuity Design As a Policy Impact Assessment Methodology - Assumptions, Key Points of Interpretation and Limitations for Practical Application - (Japanese)

Author

Listed:
  • KAINOU Kazunari

Abstract

The Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) is one of the emerging methodology for recent policy impact assessment area. But based on the unique nature of RDD, its assumptions for practical application and points to remember for the result interpretation are really different from other policy impact assessment methodologies. For now, such points are not well understood by the users and some case seems to be inadequate and inappropriate as a policy impact assessment. This paper aims to explain assumptions, key points of result interpretation and limitations for practical applications of RDD based on related major preceding papers. First, this paper shows that most of the limitations comes from the nature of RDD that it is a kind of cross section analysis and estimates local average treatment effect. Secondly, due to these natures of RDD and its assumptions, RDD has vulnerability for the relational index data, vulnerability for partially missing and concealed data, vulnerability for dependent and internal treatment selection, vulnerability for unequal distribution of "compliers" and vulnerability for stable unit treatment value related problems. Those vulnerabilities requires special care for the result interpretation. Thirdly, this paper introduces some measures to close those issues and recent new approaches to fix the problems. This paper aims to contribute to the development and fair application of RDD as a policy impact assessment methodology through above discussion.

Suggested Citation

  • KAINOU Kazunari, 2021. "Regression Discontinuity Design As a Policy Impact Assessment Methodology - Assumptions, Key Points of Interpretation and Limitations for Practical Application - (Japanese)," Policy Discussion Papers (Japanese) 21001, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:rpdpjp:21001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/pdp/21p001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Rysman, 2009. "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 125-143, Summer.
    2. Geoffrey G. Parker & Marshall W. Van Alstyne, 2005. "Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(10), pages 1494-1504, October.
    3. Helfat, Constance E. & Raubitschek, Ruth S., 2018. "Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1391-1399.
    4. Michael G. Jacobides & Carmelo Cennamo & Annabelle Gawer, 2018. "Towards a theory of ecosystems," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2255-2276, August.
    5. KWON Seokbeom & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2015. "How Institutional Arrangements in the National Innovation System Affect Industrial Competitiveness: A study of Japan and the United States with multiagent simulation," Discussion papers 15065, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    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. MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2021. "Progress of Digital Platforms and their Impact on Japan's Industrial Competitiveness," Policy Discussion Papers 21001, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    2. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    3. Junic Kim & Jaewook Yoo, 2019. "Platform Growth Model: The Four Stages of Growth Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Satish Nambisan & Shaker A. Zahra & Yadong Luo, 2019. "Global platforms and ecosystems: Implications for international business theories," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1464-1486, December.
    5. Pundziene, Asta & Gerulaitiene, Neringa & Bez, Sea Matilda & Georgescu, Irène & Mathieu, Christopher & Carrabina-Bordoll, Jordi & Rialp-Criado, Josep & Nieminen, Hannu & Varri, Alpo & Boethius, Susann, 2023. "Value capture and embeddedness in social-purpose-driven ecosystems. A multiple-case study of European digital healthcare platforms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    6. Tavalaei, M. Mahdi, 2020. "Waiting time in two-sided platforms: The case of the airport industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Islam, Habib A. & Farrell, Matthew & Nair, Anil & Zhang, Jing, 2023. "Understanding transaction platform governance and conflicts: A configuration approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    8. Roma, Paolo & Vasi, Maria, 2019. "Diversification and performance in the mobile app market: The role of the platform ecosystem," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 123-139.
    9. Zeng, Jing & Mahdi Tavalaei, M. & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Sharing economy platform firms and their resource orchestration approaches," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 451-465.
    10. Spaniol, Matthew J. & Rowland, Nicholas J., 2022. "Business ecosystems and the view from the future: The use of corporate foresight by stakeholders of the Ro-Ro shipping ecosystem in the Baltic Sea Region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Andrei Hagiu & Julian Wright, 2015. "Marketplace or Reseller?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 184-203, January.
    12. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    13. Hou, Hong & Shi, Yongjiang, 2021. "Ecosystem-as-structure and ecosystem-as-coevolution: A constructive examination," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    14. Christian Stummer & Dennis Kundisch & Reinhold Decker, 2018. "Platform Launch Strategies," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 60(2), pages 167-173, April.
    15. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    16. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Flechas, Ximena Alejandra & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Borini, Felipe Mendes, 2021. "Ecosystem management: Past achievements and future promises," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    17. Decarolis, Francesco & Li, Muxin, 2023. "Regulating online search in the EU: From the android case to the digital markets act and digital services act," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    18. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    19. Stefan Apostol, 2023. "Digitalization and Platformization in Romania Based on the Digital Platform Economy Index 2020," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(4), pages 77-103.
    20. Lapo Filistrucchi & Damien Geradin & Eric van Damme, 2012. "Identifying Two-Sided Markets," Working Papers - Economics wp2012_01.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.

    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:eti:rpdpjp:21001. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.