← ireadpaper · 顶刊中的公共政策研究

两全其美:将随机对照试验与结构建模相结合

The Best of Both Worlds: Combining Randomized Controlled Trials with Structural Modeling
Journal of Economic Literature · 2023 · Petra Todd、Kenneth I. Wolpin

中文摘要

关于经济理论应在多大程度上为计量建模与估计提供依据,一直存在长期的争论。这一争论在项目/政策评估文献中尤为明显,其中简约式(实验或准实验)方法与结构建模方法常被视为相互竞争的方法论。简约式的支持者批评结构应用中所引入的假设。结构建模的倡导者则指出简约式方法的局限,即无法在项目实施之前给出项目影响的信息,也无法就偏离已实施项目设计的其他项目设计的成本与收益提供信息。在本文中,我们认为一种新的观点正在出现,即这两类方法之间存在天然的协同作用,二者可以被融合起来,以发挥各自优势并弥补各自不足。我们举例说明,来自随机对照试验(RCTs)——即简约式实践者的典范——的数据如何能够用来增强结构估计的可信度。我们还说明,结构方法如何通过使反事实政策/项目得以评估,从而对实验分析形成补充。最后,我们综述了许多近期研究,这些研究在经济学不同子领域中,以多种方式将上述方法结合起来。(JEL C21, C52, C53, H24, I38, J13, R38)

Abstract

There is a long-standing debate about the extent to which economic theory should inform econometric modeling and estimation. This debate is particularly evident in the program/policy evaluation literature, where reduced-form (experimental or quasi-experimental) and structural modeling approaches are often viewed as rival methodologies. Reduced-form proponents criticize the assumptions invoked in structural applications. Structural modeling advocates point to the limitations of reduced-form approaches in not being able to inform about program impacts prior to implementation or about the costs and benefits of program designs that deviate from the one that was implemented. In this paper, we argue that there is a new emerging view of a natural synergy between these two approaches, that they can be melded to exploit the advantages and ameliorate the disadvantages of each. We provide examples of how data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the exemplar of reduced form practitioners, can be used to enhance the credibility of structural estimation. We also illustrate how the structural approach complements experimental analyses by enabling evaluation of counterfactual policies/programs. Lastly, we survey many recent studies that combine these methodologies in various ways across different subfields within economics. (JEL C21, C52, C53, H24, I38, J13, R38)
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →