IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

On the Specification of Propensity Scores: with an Application to the WTO-Environment Debate

  • Daniel Millimet


    (Southern Methodist University)

  • Rusty Tchernis


    (Indiana University Bloomington)

The use of propensity score methods for program evaluation with non-experimental data typically requires the propensity score be estimated, often with a model whose specification is unknown. While theoretical results suggest that estimators utilizing more flexible propensity score specifications perform better, this has not filtered into applied research. Here, we provide Monte Carlo evidence indicating the benefits of over-specifying the propensity score when using weighting estimators, as well as using normalized weights. We illustrate these results with an application assessing the environmental effects of GATT/WTO membership. We find that membership has a mixed impact, and that under-fitting the propensity score yields misleading inference in several cases.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Economics Department, Indiana University Bloomington in its series Caepr Working Papers with number 2006-013.

in new window

Length: 28 pages
Date of creation: Sep 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:inu:caeprp:2006013
Contact details of provider: Postal: 812-855-1021
Phone: 812-855-1021
Fax: 812-855-3736
Web page:

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. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "The WTO as a Mechanism for Securing Market Access Property Rights: Implications for Global Labor and Environmental Issues," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
  2. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2000. "Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score," NBER Technical Working Papers 0251, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Chintrakarn, Pandej & Millimet, Daniel, 2005. "The Environmental Consequences of Trade: Evidence from Subnational Trade Flows," Departmental Working Papers 0501, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
  4. Hidehiko Ichimura & Oliver Linton, 2001. "Asymptotic expansions for some semiparametric program evaluation estimators," CeMMAP working papers CWP04/01, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  5. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Causal Effects in Non-Experimental Studies: Re-Evaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs," NBER Working Papers 6586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Zhao, Zhong, 2008. "Sensitivity of propensity score methods to the specifications," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 309-319, March.
  7. Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Do WTO Members have More Liberal Trade Policy?," NBER Working Papers 9347, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Domestic Policies, National Sovereignty, And International Economic Institutions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(2), pages 519-562, May.
  9. Copeland,B.R. & Scott Taylor,M., 2003. "Trade, growth and the environment," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  10. Elizabeth R. DeSombre & J. Samuel Barkin, 2002. "Turtles and Trade: The WTO's Acceptance of Environmental Trade Restrictions," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 2(1), pages 12-18, 02.
  11. Robyn Eckersley, 2004. "The Big Chill: The WTO and Multilateral Environmental Agreements," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 4(2), pages 24-50, 05.
  12. 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.
  13. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
  14. 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.
  15. Andrew Rose, 2005. "Which International Institutions Promote International Trade?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 682-698, 09.
  16. Jinyong Hahn, 1998. "On the Role of the Propensity Score in Efficient Semiparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 315-332, March.
  17. 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.
  18. Rose, Andrew K, 2002. "Do We Really Know that the WTO Increases Trade?," CEPR Discussion Papers 3538, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 1998. "Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?," NBER Working Papers 6707, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Guido W. Imbens & Whitney Newey & Geert Ridder, 2005. "Mean-square-error Calculations for Average Treatment Effects," IEPR Working Papers 05.34, Institute of Economic Policy Research (IEPR).
  21. David H. Romer & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1999. "Does Trade Cause Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 379-399, June.
  22. Heckman, James J. & Robb, Richard Jr., 1985. "Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions : An overview," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 239-267.
  23. Alex Bryson & Richard Dorsett & Susan Purdon, 2002. "The use of propensity score matching in the evaluation of active labour market policies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4993, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
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:inu:caeprp:2006013. 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: (Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research)

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.