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

Sequential Matching Estimation of Dynamic Causal Models

  • Michael Lechner

    ()

This paper proposes sequential matching and inverse selection probability weighting to estimate dynamic casual effects. The sequential matching estimators extend simple, matching estimators based on propensity scores for static causal analysis that have been frequently applied in the evaluation literature. A Monte Carlo study shows that the suggested estimators perform well in small and medium seize samples. Based on the application of the sequential matching estimators to an empirical problem - an evaluation study of the Swiss active labour market policies - some implementational issues are discussed and results are provided.

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://ux-tauri.unisg.ch/RePEc/usg/dp2004/dp06_lechner_ganz.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen in its series University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2004 with number 2004-06.

as
in new window

Length: 50 pages
Date of creation: Jun 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:usg:dp2004:2004-06
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Dufourstrasse 50, CH - 9000 St.Gallen

Phone: +41 71 224 23 25
Fax: +41 71 224 31 35
Web page: http://www.seps.unisg.ch/
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. Michael Lechner, 2005. "Some practical issues in the evaluation of heterogeneous labour market programmes by matching methods," Labor and Demography 0505006, EconWPA.
  2. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Propensity Score Matching Methods for Non-experimental Causal Studies," NBER Working Papers 6829, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Jaap H. Abbring & Gerard J. van den Berg, 2003. "The Nonparametric Identification of Treatment Effects in Duration Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1491-1517, 09.
  4. Speckesser, Stefan & Fitzenberger, Bernd & Bergemann, Annette, 2004. "Evaluating the Dynamic Employment Effects of Training Programs in East Germany Using Conditional Difference-in-Differences," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-41, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  5. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
  6. Gerfin, Michael & Lechner, Michael & Steiger, Heidi, 2002. "Does Subsidised Temporary Employment Get the Unemployed Back to Work? An Econometric Analysis of Two Different Schemes," IZA Discussion Papers 606, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  7. Arellano, Manuel & Honore, Bo, 2001. "Panel data models: some recent developments," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 53, pages 3229-3296 Elsevier.
  8. Arulampalam, Wiji & Booth, Alison L, 2001. "Learning and Earning: Do Multiple Training Events Pay? A Decade of Evidence from a Cohort of Young British Men," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 68(271), pages 379-400, August.
  9. 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.
  10. Nevo, Aviv, 2003. "Using Weights to Adjust for Sample Selection When Auxiliary Information Is Available," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 21(1), pages 43-52, January.
  11. Lechner, Michael, 1999. "Identification and Estimation of Causal Effects of Multiple Treatments Under the Conditional Independence Assumption," IZA Discussion Papers 91, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  12. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2002. "Inverse probability weighted M-estimators for sample selection, attrition and stratification," CeMMAP working papers CWP11/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  13. 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.
  14. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
  15. Sianesi, Barbara, 2001. "An evaluation of the active labour market programmes in Sweden," Working Paper Series 2001:5, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
  16. Gerfin, Michael & Lechner, Michael, 2000. "Microeconometric Evaluation of the Active Labour Market Policy in Switzerland," IZA Discussion Papers 154, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  17. Guido W. Imbens, 1999. "The Role of the Propensity Score in Estimating Dose-Response Functions," NBER Technical Working Papers 0237, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Heckman, J.J. & Hotz, V.J., 1988. "Choosing Among Alternative Nonexperimental Methods For Estimating The Impact Of Social Programs: The Case Of Manpower Training," University of Chicago - Economics Research Center 88-12, Chicago - Economics Research Center.
  19. Hidehiko Ichimura & Oliver Linton, 2003. "Asymptotic Expansions for Some Semiparametric Program Evaluation Estimators," STICERD - Econometrics Paper Series 451, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
  20. Joshua Angrist & Alan Krueger, 1998. "Empirical Strategies in Labor Economics," Working papers 98-7, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  21. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
  22. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  23. 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.
  24. Petra E. Todd & Jeffrey A. Smith, 2001. "Reconciling Conflicting Evidence on the Performance of Propensity-Score Matching Methods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 112-118, May.
  25. Michael Lechner, 2000. "Programme Heterogeneity and Propensity Score Matching: An Application to the Evaluation of Active Labour Market Policies," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0647, Econometric Society.
  26. 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.
  27. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2002. "Simple and Bias-Corrected Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," NBER Technical Working Papers 0283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. 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.
  29. Ham, John C & LaLonde, Robert J, 1996. "The Effect of Sample Selection and Initial Conditions in Duration Models: Evidence from Experimental Data on Training," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(1), pages 175-205, January.
  30. Abbring, Jaap H. & van den Berg, Gerard J., 2002. "Dynamically assigned treatments: duration models, binary treatment models, and panel data models," Working Paper Series 2002:20, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
  31. Li Y.P. & Propert K. J. & Rosenbaum P. R., 2001. "Balanced Risk Set Matching," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 870-882, September.
  32. Lechner, Michael, 1999. "Earnings and Employment Effects of Continuous Off-the-Job Training in East Germany after Unification," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 17(1), pages 74-90, January.
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:usg:dp2004:2004-06. 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: (Joerg Baumberger)

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.