some comments

Post Reply
Luca Tiberti
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:31 am
Contact:

some comments

Post by Luca Tiberti » Thu May 30, 2019 12:38 pm

Thanks Kamal and team for your interesting and challenging paper!

Just a few comments:
- an attrition rate of 18.4% is not low. Please discuss better why we should be confident that the final sample selection is not biased. Or, try to address it through standard ways
- Selection into labour market participation: how is this addressed in the paper (the Lewbel approach is not enough, but it just deals with the endogeneity of the treatment)
- please discuss the direction of the bias
- "household shock" does not seem a convincing IV external variable (reverse causality, directly related to your outcomes, etc).

I am also sharing a few papers you may find interesting:
- Fitzgerald et al. (to address attrition)
- Semykina (paper + codes here http://myweb.fsu.edu/asemykina/white_women_NLSY.do)
- my paper on Brazil (to see how I interpreted the Lewbel IV)

Thanks,
Luca
Attachments
_system_appendPDF_proof_hi.pdf
(461.3 KiB) Downloaded 13 times
Semykina-2018-Journal_of_Applied_Econometrics.pdf
(1.1 MiB) Downloaded 13 times
Fitzgerald at al. (an analysis of sample attrition in panel data).pdf
(4.99 MiB) Downloaded 13 times

Post Reply

Return to “PMMA-20167 - Employment vulnerability, earnings and subjective well-being in Kyrgyzstan”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest