2 2 natural experiments y y 1 y 0 y 1 y 0 y 1 y 0 counterfactual y 1 y 0 d treatment indicator d = 1 (treatment group) d = 0 control group average tre

Similar documents
2 Tobin (1958) 2 limited dependent variables: LDV 2 corner solution 2 truncated censored x top coding censor from above censor from below 2 Heck

2 1,2, , 2 ( ) (1) (2) (3) (4) Cameron and Trivedi(1998) , (1987) (1982) Agresti(2003)

dvi

9 1 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1)-(5) (i) (i + 1) 4 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1)-(2) (1)-(5) (5) 1

Stata User Group Meeting in Kyoto / ( / ) Stata User Group Meeting in Kyoto / 21

Ishi

4.9 Hausman Test Time Fixed Effects Model vs Time Random Effects Model Two-way Fixed Effects Model

第11回:線形回帰モデルのOLS推定

Law and Economics Review vol.4,no.1(february 2009) 1998

2 2 2 (Poisson Distribution) P (y = j) = e λ λ j λ > 0, j = 0, 1, 2... j! j! j E(y) = V ar(y) = λ λ y x λ = λ(x iβ) f(y i x iβ) = exp( exp(x i β)) exp

A5 PDF.pwd

こんにちは由美子です

y i OLS [0, 1] OLS x i = (1, x 1,i,, x k,i ) β = (β 0, β 1,, β k ) G ( x i β) 1 G i 1 π i π i P {y i = 1 x i } = G (

「スウェーデン企業におけるワーク・ライフ・バランス調査 」報告書

* 積極的労働市場政策と若年雇用 山本勲野原快太 DD DD

C. R. McKenzie ( 38 ) (Keio Household Panel Survey) control group treatment group 1

80 X 1, X 2,, X n ( λ ) λ P(X = x) = f (x; λ) = λx e λ, x = 0, 1, 2, x! l(λ) = n f (x i ; λ) = i=1 i=1 n λ x i e λ i=1 x i! = λ n i=1 x i e nλ n i=1 x

最小2乗法

untitled

東京大学社会科学研究所パネル調査プロジェクトディスカッションペーパーシリーズ No 年 5 月 朝食摂取習慣の教育達成への因果効果の検証 傾向スコアマッチングと感度分析によるアプローチ 小川和孝 ( 東京大学 ) 要旨本論文の目的は 15 歳時の朝食摂取習慣が中学校における校内成績と

.. est table TwoSLS1 TwoSLS2 GMM het,b(%9.5f) se Variable TwoSLS1 TwoSLS2 GMM_het hi_empunion totchr

Kobe University Repository : Kernel タイトル Title 著者 Author(s) 掲載誌 巻号 ページ Citation 刊行日 Issue date 資源タイプ Resource Type 版区分 Resource Version 権利 Rights DOI

untitled

,,,


i 2 ii) iii (random sampling) 3 (purposive selection) 2 4 (stratified sampling) 2 two-stage sampling 2 3 4

雇用と年金の接続 在職老齢年金の就業抑制効果と老齢厚生年金受給資格者の基礎年金繰上げ受給要因に関する分析 The Labour Market Behaviour of Older People: Analysing the Impact of the Reformed "Earning Test"

AR(1) y t = φy t 1 + ɛ t, ɛ t N(0, σ 2 ) 1. Mean of y t given y t 1, y t 2, E(y t y t 1, y t 2, ) = φy t 1 2. Variance of y t given y t 1, y t

税制改正にともなう家計の所得弾性値 : 高齢者パネルデータによる実証分析

遺産相続、学歴及び退職金の決定要因に関する実証分析 『家族関係、就労、退職金及び教育・資産の世代間移転に関する世帯アンケート調査』

Evaluation of a SATOYAMA Forest Using a Voluntary Labor Supply Curve Version: c 2003 Taku Terawaki, Akio Muranaka URL: http

ヒストリカル法によるバリュー・アット・リスクの計測:市場価格変動の非定常性への実務的対応

1 y x y = α + x β+ε (1) x y (2) x y (1) (2) (1) y (2) x y (1) (2) y x y ε x 12 x y 3 3 β x β x 1 1 β 3 1

untitled

第13回:交差項を含む回帰・弾力性の推定

ボーナス制度と家計貯蓄率-サーベイ・データによる再検証-

わが国企業による資金調達方法の選択問題

日本内科学会雑誌第102巻第4号

取引銀行の破綻が企業経営に及ぼす影響について-阪和銀行破綻の事例分析-

橡表紙参照.PDF

フィナンシャルレビュー 第80号

Microsoft Word _01鉄道料金班最終報告書.docx

1 Stata SEM LightStone 4 SEM 4.. Alan C. Acock, Discovering Structural Equation Modeling Using Stata, Revised Edition, Stata Press 3.


J. JILA 64 (5), 2001

こんにちは由美子です

パネル・データの分析

, 1), 2) (Markov-Switching Vector Autoregression, MSVAR), 3) 3, ,, , TOPIX, , explosive. 2,.,,,.,, 1

高齢化とマクロ投資比率―国際パネルデータを用いた分析―

Microsoft Word - 計量研修テキスト_第5版).doc

Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series No.248 東京圏における 1990 年代以降の住み替え行動 住宅需要実態調査 を用いた Mixed Logit 分析 小林庸平行武憲史 March 2008 Hitotsubashi University Research Unit

seminar0220a.dvi

Stata 11 Stata ROC whitepaper mwp anova/oneway 3 mwp-042 kwallis Kruskal Wallis 28 mwp-045 ranksum/median / 31 mwp-047 roctab/roccomp ROC 34 mwp-050 s

% 10%, 35%( 1029 ) p (a) 1 p 95% (b) 1 Std. Err. (c) p 40% 5% (d) p 1: STATA (1). prtesti One-sample test of pr

ohpmain.dvi

山形大学紀要

Stata11 whitepapers mwp-037 regress - regress regress. regress mpg weight foreign Source SS df MS Number of obs = 74 F(

Autumn II III Zon and Muysken 2005 Zon and Muysken 2005 IV II 障害者への所得移転の経済効果 分析に用いるデータ

研究シリーズ第40号

082_rev2_utf8.pdf

JGSS統計分析セミナー2009-傾向スコアを用いた因果分析-

GJG160842_O.QXD

Stata 11 Stata ts (ARMA) ARCH/GARCH whitepaper mwp 3 mwp-083 arch ARCH 11 mwp-051 arch postestimation 27 mwp-056 arima ARMA 35 mwp-003 arima postestim

LA-VAR Toda- Yamamoto(1995) VAR (Lag Augmented vector autoregressive model LA-VAR ) 2 2 Nordhaus(1975) 3 1 (D2)

2014 年 9 月 8 日掲載承認 * 積極的労働市場政策と若年雇用 山本勲野原快太 DD DD

Microsoft Word - Šv”|“Å‘I.DOC

50-4 平井健之.pwd

,.,,.,. NIRA,.,.,,, GDP.,., 1%, 2.0% 3).,,.,,., 1, 4).,,.,, GDP,.,,.,,,.,,., 2002.,,., 3), Q&A Q16 (

60 Vol. 44 No. 1 2 準市場 化の制度的枠組み: 英国 教育改革法 1988 の例 Education Reform Act a School Performance Tables LEA 4 LEA LEA 3

精神障害者

1. 2. (Rowthorn, 2014) / 39 1

(2004 ) 2 (A) (B) (C) 3 (1987) (1988) Shimono and Tachibanaki(1985) (2008) , % 2 (1999) (2005) 3 (2005) (2006) (2008)

28

DVIOUT-swp00

DP

03.Œk’ì

日本統計学会誌, 第44巻, 第2号, 251頁-270頁

オーストラリア研究紀要 36号(P)☆/3.橋本


SUSENAS Kor Modul (2) (3) (4)

Auerbach and Kotlikoff(1987) (1987) (1988) 4 (2004) 5 Diamond(1965) Auerbach and Kotlikoff(1987) 1 ( ) ,

46−ª3�=4�“ƒ‚S“·‚Ö‡¦

4 OLS 4 OLS 4.1 nurseries dual c dual i = c + βnurseries i + ε i (1) 1. OLS Workfile Quick - Estimate Equation OK Equation specification dual c nurser

untitled

kubostat2017b p.1 agenda I 2017 (b) probability distribution and maximum likelihood estimation :

01.Œk’ì/“²fi¡*

x T = (x 1,, x M ) x T x M K C 1,, C K 22 x w y 1: 2 2

日本内科学会雑誌第98巻第4号

日本内科学会雑誌第97巻第7号

tnbp59-21_Web:P2/ky132379509610002944

日本の高齢者世帯の貯蓄行動に関する実証分析

+深見将志.indd

!!! 2!

untitled

BB 報告書完成版_修正版) doc

ed srv.cc.hit-u.ac.jp

Rによる計量分析:データ解析と可視化 - 第3回 Rの基礎とデータ操作・管理

1990年代以降の日本の経済変動

02.„o“φiflì„㙃fic†j

1 (1997) (1997) 1974:Q3 1994:Q3 (i) (ii) ( ) ( ) 1 (iii) ( ( 1999 ) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) ( 1995,pp ) 1

Transcription:

12 1 Heckman and Smith (1998) Lee(2005) Cameron and Tridevi (2005, Chapter 25) Wooldridge (2003, Chapter 18) 1

2 2 natural experiments y y 1 y 0 y 1 y 0 y 1 y 0 counterfactual y 1 y 0 d treatment indicator d = 1 (treatment group) d = 0 control group average treatment effect : ATE AT E = E(y 1 y 0 ) (average treatment effect on the treated: ATT) AT T = E(y 1 y 0 d = 1) = E(y 1 d = 1) E(y 0 d = 1)

3 E(y 0 d = 0) y 0 d AT T AT T E(y 1 d = 1) E(y 0 d = 0) AT E AT E AT E = P (d = 1)E(y 1 y 0 d = 1) + P (d = 0)E(y 1 y 0 d = 0) E(y 0 d = 1) E(y 1 d = 0) y 1 d AT E AT T AT E = AT T E(y 1 d = 1) E(y 0 d = 0) (1) 1 (2) 3 1 Differences-in-Differences (DID) 1 Cameron and Trivedi (2005,25

4 b(=before) a(=after) T E Before-After(BA) T E i = E i (y 1a d = 1) E i (y 1b d = 1) = BA i T E j = E j (y 0a d = 0) E j (y 0b d = 0) = BA j 2 DID DID = T E i T E j = BA i BA j = E i (y 1a y 1b d = 1) E i (y 0a y 0b d = 0) BA i BA j DID y Ashenfelter s dip y y y i0a = x iβ + γy ib + δ a + ε ia y i1a = x iβ + γy ib + δ a + αd ia + ε ia δ a time drift α α DID 2 Cross-Section CS T E = E(y 1a d = 1) E(y 0a d = 0) = CS y 0a d = 0 y 0a d = 1 2 2 1 first difference:fd DID FD

5 y 1b d = 1 y 0b d = 0 CS = DID y i0 = x iβ 0 + u i0 y i1 = x iβ 1 + u i1 d i = z iγ + ε i d i d i = { 1 iff d i > 0 0 iff d i 0 E(u 1 x, z) = E(u 0 x, z) = 0 y i1 E[y i0 d i = 1] = y i1 x iβ 0 + σ 0ε φ(z i γ) (1 Φ(z i γ)) E[y i1 d i = 1] E[y i0 d i = 1] = x i(β 1 β 0 ) + (σ 0ε σ 01ε ) φ(z i γ) Φ(z i γ) (σ 0ε σ 01ε ) φ(z i γ) Φ(z i γ) exact matching propensity score 3 [Pr[d i = 1 x]] 3 Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983)

6 propensity score caliper matching 4 5 M = 1 N T i1 i {d=1}[y w(i, j)y j0 ] j w(i, j) = 1 0 < w(i, j) 1 N T (1) nearest-neighbor matching i A i (x) = {j min j x i x j } 6 (2) (kernel matching) w(i, j) = K(x j x i )/ N ic j=1 K(x j x i ) K (3) stratification matching) propensity score (4) radius matching A i (p(x)) = {p j p i p j < r} propensity score r 4 Lalonde (1986) Dehejia and Wahba (1999, 2002) Cameron and Trivedi (2005, Chapter 25) 4 5 Abadie et al (2004) Becker and Ichino (2002) Becker and Caliendo (2007) 6

7 the National Supported Work (NSW) 1970 NSW Lalonde(1986) 1976-77 185 Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) 2490 55 1 71% 30% 1982 1978 (RE78) 2 4 1978 treatment-control comparison $-15205 1 2 control function estimator OLS RE78 i = x iβ + αd i + u i 2 α = $217.944 3 before-after comparison(ba) RE78 RE75 1 $6349-$1532=$4817 4 differencesin-differences(did) RE75 RE78 $21553.920-$19063.340=$2490.58, DID $4817-$2491=$2326 OLS RE it = φ + δd78 it + γαd i + αd78 it d i + u i D78 1978 d = t = 1975, 1978

8 α DID 3 propensity score $995 Cameron and Trivedi (2005, p.895 $1000-$2000 5 6 STATA Lalonde(1986) Cameron www.econ.ucdavis.edu /faculty/cameron nswpsid.da1 Cameron and Trivedi (2005, Chapter 25) MMA25P1TREATMENT.DO set more off using nswpsid.da1 /*Data Generation*/ 1974 U74 1975 U75

9 drop U74 U75 gen U74 = cond(re74 == 0, 1, 0) gen U75 = cond(re75 == 0, 1, 0) gen AGESQ = AGE*AGE gen EDUCSQ = EDUC*EDUC gen NODEGREE = 0 replace NODEGREE = 1 if EDUC < 12 gen RE74SQ = RE74*RE74 gen RE75SQ = RE75*RE75 gen U74BLACK = U74*BLACK gen U74HISP = U74*HISP sum AGE EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP MARR U74 U75 RE74 RE75 RE78 TREAT AGESQ EDUCSQ RE74SQ RE75SQ U74BLACK U74HISP /* */ bysort TREAT: sum AGE EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP MARR U74 U75 RE74 RE75 RE78 TREAT AGESQ EDUCSQ RE74SQ RE75SQ U74BLACK /* Treatment-control comparison */ regress RE78 T regress RE78 TREAT, robust /* Control function estimator */ regress RE78 TREAT AGE AGESQ EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP RE74 RE75 regress RE78 TREAT AGE AGESQ EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP RE74 RE75, robust * gen TAGE = TREAT*AGE gen TAGESQ = TREAT*AGESQ gen TEDUC = TREAT*EDUC gen TNODEGREE = TREAT*NODEGREE gen TBLACK = TREAT*BLACK gen THISP = TREAT*HISP gen TRE74 = TREAT*RE74 gen TRE75 = TREAT*RE75

10 regress RE78 TREAT AGE AGESQ EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP RE74 RE75 TAGE TAGESQ TEDUC TNODEGREE TBLACK THISP TRE74 TRE75 /* Differences-in-differences*/ gen id = n label variable id id gen EARNS1 = RE75 gen EARNS2 = RE78 reshape long EARNS, i(id) j(year) gen dyear2 = 0 replace dyear2 = 1 if year==2 gen Tdyear2 = TREAT*dyear2 regress EARNS Tdyear2 TREAT dyear2 regress EARNS Tdyear2 TREAT dyear2, robust /* 2 Before-after comparison*/ regress EARNS Tdyear2 if TREAT==1 regress EARNS Tdyear2 if TREAT==1, robust /* Propensity score */ logit TREAT AGE AGESQ EDUC EDUCSQ MARR NODEGREE BLACK HISP RE74 RE75 RE74SQ RE75SQ U74BLACK predict PSCORE propensity score sum PSCORE if TREAT==1 scalar PTMIN = r(min) scalar PTMAX = r(max) sum PSCORE if TREAT==0 scalar PCMIN = r(min) scalar PCMAX = r(max) drop if PSCORE < PTMIN drop if PSCORE < PCMIN drop if PSCORE > PTMAX drop if PSCORE > PCMAX sum PSCORE gen PSCORESQ = PSCORE*PSCORE regress RE78 TREAT PSCORE PSCORESQ *Propensity score 10

11 global cut1 = 0.1 global cut2 = 0.2 global cut3 = 0.3 global cut4 = 0.4 global cut5 = 0.5 global cut6 = 0.6 global cut7 = 0.7 global cut8 = 0.8 global cut9 = 0.9 gen STRATA = 1 replace STRATA = 2 if PSCORE > $cut1 & PSCORE <= $cut2 replace STRATA = 3 if PSCORE > $cut2 & PSCORE <= $cut3 replace STRATA = 4 if PSCORE > $cut3 & PSCORE <= $cut4 replace STRATA = 5 if PSCORE > $cut4 & PSCORE <= $cut5 replace STRATA = 6 if PSCORE > $cut5 & PSCORE <= $cut6 replace STRATA = 7 if PSCORE > $cut6 & PSCORE <= $cut7 replace STRATA = 8 if PSCORE > $cut7 & PSCORE <= $cut8 replace STRATA = 9 if PSCORE > $cut8 & PSCORE <= $cut9 replace STRATA = 10 if PSCORE > $cut9 tab STRATA T tab STRATA TREAT, sum(age) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(educ) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(marr) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(nodegree) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(black) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(hisp) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(re74) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(re75) nostand nofreq tab STRATA TREAT, sum(u74black) nostand nofreq bysort STRATA: oneway EDUC T #delimit ; global sum = 0 ; /* Sums the estimate of interest over strata ; global sumwgt = 0 ; /* Sums the number of treated obs over strata */ global count = 0 ; /* This gives the number of Strata used */ global numcut = 10; global XLIST AGE AGESQ EDUC NODEGREE BLACK HISP RE74 RE75;

12 forvalues i = 1/$numcut { ; global addon = 0 ; /* Within strata estiamte of interest */ global tobs = 0 ; /* Within strata number of treated obs */ capture { ; quiet regress RE78 TREAT $XLIST if STRATA == i ; global addon = b[treat] ; quiet summarize TREAT if TREAT==1 & STRATA== i ; global tobs = result(1) ; * # of treatment observations ; } ; di i estimate = $addon Top cut = ${cut i } #treat obs = $tobs ; if $addon = 0 { ; global sum = $sum + $addon * $tobs ; global sumwgt = $sumwgt + $tobs ; global count = $count + 1 ; } ; } ; #delimit cr ; Prppensity score di $sum / $sumwgt Count = $count [1] 2005) [2] Abadie, Alberto, Drukker, David, Herr, Jane Leber, and Imbens, Guido W.(2004) Implementing Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects in Stata, The Stata Journal, 4(3), pp.290-311. [3] Becker, Sascha O. and Ichino, Andrea.(2002) Estimsation of Average Treatment Effects Based on Propensity Scores, The Stata Journal, 2(4), pp.358-377. [4] Becker, Sascha O. and Caliendo, Marco. (2007) mhbounds-sensitivity Analysis for Average Treatment Effects, The Stata Journal, 7(1), pp.71-83. [5] Cameron, A.C. and Trivedi, P.K.(2005) Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press.

13 [6] Dehejia, R.H.and Wahba,S.(1999) Reevaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, pp.1053-1062. [7] Dehejia, R.H. and Wahba, S.(2002) Propensity Score-Matching Methods for Nonexperimental Causal Studies, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), pp.151-161. [8] Heckman, J.J. and Robb, R.(1985) Alternative Methods for Estimating The Impact of Interventions, in J. Heckman and B. Singer (eds), Longotudinal Analysis of Labor Market Data, Cambridge University Press. [9] Heckman, J.J. and Smith, J.A.(1998) Evaluating the Welfare State, in Strøm, S.(ed) Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century: The Ragner Frisch Centennial Symposium, Cambridge University Press., pp.241-318. [10] Holland, P.W.(1986) Statistics and Causal Inference, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, pp.945-960. [11] Lalonde, R.(1986) Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data, American Economic Review, 76, pp.604-620. [12] Lee, Myoung, Jae. (2005) Micro-Econometrics for Policy, Programm, and Treatment Effects, Oxford University Press. [13] Moffitt, R.(1991) Program Evaluation with Nonexperimental Data, Evaluation Review, 15., pp.103-120. [14] Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D.B.(1983) The Central Role of Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects, Biometrika, 70, pp.41-55. [15] Rubin, D.B.(1974) Estimating Causal Effects of Treatments in Randomized and Nonrandmized Studies, Journal of Education Psychology, 66, pp.688-701. [16] Winkelmann, Rainer and Boes, Stefan.(2006) Analysis of Microdata, Springer. [17] Wooldridge, Jeffrey. M.(2003) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, The MIT Press

表 1 変数の定義と平均値の比較 変数 定義 全体処理群対照群 Mean Mean Mean AGE 年齢 34.226 25.816 34.851 EDUC 教育年数 11.994 10.346 12.117 NODEGREE 教育年数が12より小さいダミー 0.333 0.708 0.305 BLACK 黒人ダミー 0.292 0.843 0.251 HISP ヒスパニックダミー 0.034 0.059 0.033 MARR 結婚ダミー 0.819 0.189 0.866 U74 1974 年の失業ダミー 0.129 0.708 0.086 U75 1975 年の失業ダミー 0.135 0.600 0.100 RE74 1982 年のドル価値で1974 年の実質賃金 18230.000 2095.574 19428.750 RE75 1982 年のドル価値で1975 年の実質賃金 17850.890 1532.056 19063.340 RE78 1982 年のドル価値で1978 年の実質賃金 20502.380 6349.145 21553.920 TREAT 処理群 =1 対照群 =0 0.069 1.000 0 AGESQ 年齢の二乗 1281.610 717.395 1323.530 EDUCSQ 教育年数の二乗 153.186 111.060 156.316 RE74SQ 1982 年のドル価値で1974 年の実質賃金の二乗 5.21E+08 2.81E+07 5.57E+08 RE75SQ 1982 年のドル価値で1975 年の実質賃金の二乗 5.11E+08 1.27E+07 5.48E+08 U74BLACK 黒人で1974 年に失業しているダミー 0.055 0.600 0.014 U74HISP ヒスパニックで1974 年に失業しているダミー 0.006 - - Sample Size 2675 185 2490

表 2 職業訓練の賃金効果の推定 Dependent Variable: RE78 Treatment-control comparison Coefficient Robust z-ratio Control function estimator Coefficient Robust z-ratio Before-after comparison Coefficient Robust z-ratio Differences-indifferences Coefficient Robust z-ratio TREAT -15205-23.18 217.944 0.28-17531.280-48.62 AGE 158.506 1.05 AGESQ -3.233-1.54 EDUC 564.624 4.64 NODEGREE 502.091 0.79 BLACK -699.335-1.62 HISP 2226.535 1.83 RE74 0.279 4.51 RE75 0.568 8.56 Tdyear2 4817.09 7.71 2326.505 3.11 dyear2 2490.585 6.01 _cons 21553.92 69.13-2836.703-0.97 1532.056 6.47 19063.340 69.95 Number of observation R-squared 2675 0.061 2675 0.586 370 0.139 5350 0.087 Root MSE 15152 10075 6010.8 14185

表 3 Propensity Score のためのロジット推定 Dependent Variable: TREAT Coefficient Robust z-ratio AGE 0.331 2.75 AGESQ -0.006-3.42 EDUC 0.825 2.33 EDUCSQ -0.048-2.60 MARR -1.884-6.29 NODEGREE 0.130 0.30 BLACK 1.133 3.22 HISP 1.963 3.46 RE74 0.000-2.95 RE75 0.000-5.23 RE74SQ 0.000 3.59 RE75SQ 0.000 0.24 U74BLACK 2.137 5.00 _cons -7.552-3.08 Number of observation Log Likelihood LR chi2(13) Prob>chi2 Pseudo R2 2675-204.9295 935.44 0.000 0.695