IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fgv/eesptd/201.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bounds on functionals of the distribution treatment effects

Author

Listed:
  • Firpo, Sergio Pinheiro
  • Ridder, Geert

Abstract

Bounds on the distribution function of the sum of two random variables with known marginal distributions obtained by Makarov (1981) can be used to bound the cumulative distribution function (c.d.f.) of individual treatment effects. Identification of the distribution of individual treatment effects is important for policy purposes if we are interested in functionals of that distribution, such as the proportion of individuals who gain from the treatment and the expected gain from the treatment for these individuals. Makarov bounds on the c.d.f. of the individual treatment effect distribution are pointwise sharp, i.e. they cannot be improved in any single point of the distribution. We show that the Makarov bounds are not uniformly sharp. Specifically, we show that the Makarov bounds on the region that contains the c.d.f. of the treatment effect distribution in two (or more) points can be improved, and we derive the smallest set for the c.d.f. of the treatment effect distribution in two (or more) points. An implication is that the Makarov bounds on a functional of the c.d.f. of the individual treatment effect distribution are not best possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Firpo, Sergio Pinheiro & Ridder, Geert, 2010. "Bounds on functionals of the distribution treatment effects," Textos para discussão 201, FGV EESP - Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Fundação Getulio Vargas (Brazil).
    • Handle: RePEc:fgv:eesptd:201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/b4abccc0-bf50-4fd3-b1b1-c504b02bf04c/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Djebbari, Habiba & Smith, Jeffrey, 2008. "Heterogeneous impacts in PROGRESA," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1-2), pages 64-80, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toru Kitagawa, 2011. "Inference and decision for set identified parameters using posterior lower and upper probabilities," CeMMAP working papers CWP16/11, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Erich Battistin & Mario Padula, 2016. "Survey instruments and the reports of consumption expenditures: evidence from the consumer expenditure surveys," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 179(2), pages 559-581, February.
    3. Yanqin Fan & Sang Soo Park, 2009. "Partial identification of the distribution of treatment effects and its confidence sets," Advances in Econometrics, in: Nonparametric Econometric Methods, pages 3-70, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    4. Sergio Firpo & Cristine Pinto, 2016. "Identification and Estimation of Distributional Impacts of Interventions Using Changes in Inequality Measures," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 457-486, April.
    5. Gautier, Eric & Hoderlein, Stefan, 2011. "A triangular treatment effect model with random coefficients in the selection equation," TSE Working Papers 15-598, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised 25 Aug 2015.
    6. Juan Carlos Escanciano & Lin Zhu, 2013. "Set inferences and sensitivity analysis in semiparametric conditionally identified models," CeMMAP working papers CWP55/13, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Fan, Yanqin & Yu, Zhengfei, 2012. "Partial identification of distributional and quantile treatment effects in difference-in-differences models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 511-515.
    8. Jinhyun Lee, 2013. "Sharp Bounds on Heterogeneous Individual Treatment Responses," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201310, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews.

    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. Tiziano Arduini & Eleonora Patacchini & Edoardo Rainone, 2020. "Treatment Effects With Heterogeneous Externalities," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 826-838, October.
    2. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Jones, Bobby & Caudill, Barry & Nakaima, April, 2016. "Steps towards incorporating heterogeneities into program theory: A case study of a data-driven approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 88-97.
    3. Jiannan Lu & Peng Ding & Tirthankar Dasgupta, 2018. "Treatment Effects on Ordinal Outcomes: Causal Estimands and Sharp Bounds," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(5), pages 540-567, October.
    4. Bruno Crépon & Gerard J. van den Berg, 2016. "Active Labor Market Policies," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 521-546, October.
    5. Benjamin Lu & Eli Ben-Michael & Avi Feller & Luke Miratrix, 2023. "Is It Who You Are or Where You Are? Accounting for Compositional Differences in Cross-Site Treatment Effect Variation," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 48(4), pages 420-453, August.
    6. Fitzpatrick, Maria D., 2014. "Retiree health insurance for public school employees: Does it affect retirement?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 88-98.
    7. Figueroa, José Luis, 2014. "Distributional effects of Oportunidades on early child development," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 42-49.
    8. Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Lerato Phali, 2023. "On the impact of provincial development policies in South Africa," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(6), pages 1137-1152, November.
    9. Jeffrey Smith & Arthur Sweetman, 2016. "Viewpoint: Estimating the causal effects of policies and programs," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 871-905, August.
    10. Buhl-Wiggers, Julie & Kerwin, Jason T. & Muñoz-Morales, Juan & Smith, Jeffrey & Thornton, Rebecca, 2024. "Some children left behind: Variation in the effects of an educational intervention," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 243(1).
    11. Kaplan, David M., 2015. "Improved quantile inference via fixed-smoothing asymptotics and Edgeworth expansion," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 20-32.
    12. María Alzúa & Guillermo Cruces & Laura Ripani, 2013. "Welfare programs and labor supply in developing countries: experimental evidence from Latin America," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1255-1284, October.
    13. Bjorkegren, Dan & Blumenstock, Joshua & Knight, Samsun, 2022. "(Machine) Learning What Policies Value," CEPR Discussion Papers 17364, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Powell-Jackson, Timothy & Hanson, Kara & Whitty, Christopher J.M. & Ansah, Evelyn K., 2014. "Who benefits from free healthcare? Evidence from a randomized experiment in Ghana," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 305-319.
    15. Helmut Farbmacher & Peter Ihle & Ingrid Schubert & Joachim Winter & Amelie Wuppermann, 2017. "Heterogeneous Effects of a Nonlinear Price Schedule for Outpatient Care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(10), pages 1234-1248, October.
    16. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    17. Silvia H. Barcellos & Leandro S. Carvalho & Patrick Turley, 2019. "Distributional Effects of Education on Health," NBER Working Papers 25898, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Marianne Bertrand & Bruno Crépon & Alicia Marguerie & Patrick Premand, 2021. "Do Workfare Programs Live Up to Their Promises? Experimental Evidence from Cote D’Ivoire," NBER Working Papers 28664, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Steven Raphael, 2010. "Improving Employment Prospects for Former Prison Inmates: Challenges and Policy," NBER Working Papers 15874, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Matt Goldman & David M. Kaplan, 2018. "Non‐parametric inference on (conditional) quantile differences and interquantile ranges, using L‐statistics," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(2), pages 136-169, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fgv:eesptd:201. 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: Núcleo de Computação da FGV EPGE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eegvfbr.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.