IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/thg23.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating value-added returns to labor training programs with causal machine learning

Author

Listed:
  • Angell, Mintaka
  • Gold, Samantha
  • Hastings, Justine S.
  • Howison, Mark
  • Jensen, Scott
  • Keleher, Niall
  • Molitor, Daniel
  • Roberts, Amelia

Abstract

Technology may displace tens of millions of workers in the coming decades. Part of the explanation for the projected displacement is an expanding mismatch in skills that employers seek and the skills that workers possess. Effects of labor force displacement disproportionately affect low-income workers and workers within industries where technological change replaces labor. As a result, a great deal of emphasis is placed on training and reskilling workers to ease transitions into new careers. However, utilization of training programs may be below optimal levels if workers are uncertain about the returns to their investment in training. While the U.S. spends billions of dollars annually on reskilling programs and unemployment insurance, there are few measures of program effectiveness that workers and government can use to guide training investment decisions and ensure delivery of valuable reskilling and improved outcomes. In a nationwide conjoint survey experiment, we find job seekers prefer information on the value-added returns to earnings following enrollment in training and reskilling programs. We identify a clear demand for value-added measures. For every 10% increase in expected earnings, workers are 17.4% more likely to express interest in a training program. To meet this demand for information, governments can provide return on investment measures. Fortunately, the data to estimate these returns are available in state administrative data. We demonstrate a causal machine learning method that provides these missing causal estimates of value-added that workers prefer and that can provide correct incentives in the market for labor training. Focusing on a set of workforce training programs in Rhode Island, our causal machine learning estimates suggest that training increases enrollees’ future quarterly earnings by \$605. We estimate that return on investment ranges between -\$1,570 in quarterly earnings for the lowest value-added program to \$3,470 in quarterly earnings for the highest value-added program.

Suggested Citation

  • Angell, Mintaka & Gold, Samantha & Hastings, Justine S. & Howison, Mark & Jensen, Scott & Keleher, Niall & Molitor, Daniel & Roberts, Amelia, 2021. "Estimating value-added returns to labor training programs with causal machine learning," OSF Preprints thg23, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:thg23
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/thg23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/614e31a8ed4cbe0047dca2f1/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/thg23?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-620, September.
    2. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Christian Hansen & Whitney Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-68, February.
    3. Hornstein, Andreas & Krusell, Per & Violante, Giovanni L., 2005. "The Effects of Technical Change on Labor Market Inequalities," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 20, pages 1275-1370, Elsevier.
    4. Thomas J. Kane & Douglas O. Staiger, 2008. "Estimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 14607, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. David H. Autor & Alan Manning & Christopher L. Smith, 2016. "The Contribution of the Minimum Wage to US Wage Inequality over Three Decades: A Reassessment," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 58-99, January.
    6. Hornstein, Andreas & Krusell, Per & Violante, Giovanni L., 2005. "The Effects of Technical Change on Labor Market Inequalities," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 20, pages 1275-1370, Elsevier.
    7. Raj Chetty & John N. Friedman & Jonah E. Rockoff, 2014. "Measuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2593-2632, September.
    8. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "Unemployment Insurance in the Wake of the Recent Recession," Reports 43734, Congressional Budget Office.
    9. Vithala R. Rao, 2014. "Applied Conjoint Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-540-87753-0, December.
    10. Dan A. Black & Jose Galdo & Jeffrey A. Smith, 2007. "Evaluating the Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services System Using a Regression Discontinuity Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 104-107, May.
    11. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Harald Beyer & Justine Hastings & Christopher Neilson & Seth Zimmerman, 2015. "Connecting Student Loans to Labor Market Outcomes: Policy Lessons from Chile," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 508-513, May.
    13. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "Unemployment Insurance in the Wake of the Recent Recession," Reports 43734, Congressional Budget Office.
    14. Acemoglu, Daron & Autor, David, 2011. "Skills, Tasks and Technologies: Implications for Employment and Earnings," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 1043-1171, Elsevier.
    15. 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.
    16. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "Unemployment Insurance in the Wake of the Recent Recession," Reports 43734, Congressional Budget Office.
    17. Jonah E. Rockoff, 2004. "The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 247-252, May.
    18. Robert J. LaLonde, 2003. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, pages 517-586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "Unemployment Insurance in the Wake of the Recent Recession," Reports 43734, Congressional Budget Office.
    20. repec:pri:cepsud:113krusell is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Couch, Kenneth A, 1992. "New Evidence on the Long-Term Effects of Employment Training Programs," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(4), pages 380-388, October.
    22. Dayanand S. Manoli & Marios Michaelides & Ankur Patel, 2018. "Long-Term and Heterogeneous Effects of Job-Search Assistance," NBER Working Papers 24422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Asher Wolinsky, 1983. "Prices as Signals of Product Quality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 647-658.
    24. Dan A. Black & Jeffrey A. Smith & Mark C. Berger & Brett J. Noel, 2003. "Is the Threat of Reemployment Services More Effective Than the Services Themselves? Evidence from Random Assignment in the UI System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1313-1327, September.
    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. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Rothstein, Jesse & Von Wachter, Till, 2016. "Social Experiments in the Labor Market," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7957p9g6, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    3. Ding, Hong, 2012. "Is government’s help for unemployed people helpful for the society? An Empirical Study on Macro Data of Public Unemployment Spending in OECD Nations," MPRA Paper 43132, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Gabriel Chodorow-Reich & Loukas Karabarbounis, 2016. "The Limited Macroeconomic Effects of Unemployment Benefit Extensions," Working Papers 733, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    5. Jesse Rothstein & Robert G. Valletta, 2017. "Scraping by: Income and Program Participation After the Loss of Extended Unemployment Benefits," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 880-908, September.
    6. Christopher Boone & Arindrajit Dube & Lucas Goodman & Ethan Kaplan, 2021. "Unemployment Insurance Generosity and Aggregate Employment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 58-99, May.
    7. Tony Caporale & Marc Poitras, 2020. "The trouble with naïve Keynesianism," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 259-276, June.
    8. Mathias Dolls & Clemens Fuest & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl, 2018. "An unemployment insurance scheme for the euro area? A comparison of different alternatives using microdata," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(1), pages 273-309, February.
    9. Andrew Agopsowicz & Chris Robinson & Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd Stinebrickner, 2020. "Careers and Mismatch for College Graduates: College and Noncollege Jobs," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 55(4), pages 1194-1221.
    10. Zamanzadeh, Akbar & Chan, Marc K. & Ehsani, Mohammad Ali & Ganjali, Mojtaba, 2020. "Unemployment duration, Fiscal and monetary policies, and the output gap: How do the quantile relationships look like?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 613-632.
    11. Fischer, Georg, 2017. "The US Unemployment Insurance, a Federal-State Partnership: Relevance for Reflections at the European Level," IZA Policy Papers 129, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Tomaz Cajner & Andrew Figura & Brendan M. Price & David Ratner & Alison E. Weingarden, 2020. "Reconciling Unemployment Claims with Job Losses in the First Months of the COVID-19 Crisis," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2020-055, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    13. David Hémous & Morten Olsen, 2022. "The Rise of the Machines: Automation, Horizontal Innovation, and Income Inequality," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 179-223, January.
    14. Michael Bates & Michael Dinerstein & Andrew C. Johnston & Isaac Sorkin, 2022. "Teacher Labor Market Equilibrium and Student Achievement," CESifo Working Paper Series 9551, CESifo.
    15. Papay, John P. & Kraft, Matthew A., 2015. "Productivity returns to experience in the teacher labor market: Methodological challenges and new evidence on long-term career improvement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 105-119.
    16. Ingo E. Isphording & Ulf Zölitz, 2020. "The value of a peer," ECON - Working Papers 342, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    17. Pi, Jiancai & Zhang, Pengqing, 2018. "Skill-biased technological change and wage inequality in developing countries," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 347-362.
    18. Goldhaber, Dan & Krieg, John & Theobald, Roddy, 2020. "Effective like me? Does having a more productive mentor improve the productivity of mentees?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    19. Ariell Reshef, 2013. "Is Technological Change Biased Towards the Unskilled in Services? An Empirical Investigation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(2), pages 312-331, April.
    20. Michael Dinerstein & Isaac M. Opper, 2022. "Screening with Multitasking," CESifo Working Paper Series 9869, CESifo.

    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:osf:osfxxx:thg23. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.