Difference-in-differences with as few as two cross-sectional units -- A new perspective to the democracy-growth debate
仅需两个截面单位的双重差分:民主与增长的新视角AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要提出 DiD 因果估计方法,并用于国家层面的民主化与经济增长面板分析。
仅需两个截面单位的双重差分:民主与增长的新视角AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Pooled panel analyses often mask heterogeneity in unit-specific treatment effects. This challenge, for example, crops up in studies of the impact of democracy on economic growth, where findings vary substantially due to differences in country composition. To address this challenge, this paper introduces the Temporal Difference-in-Differences (T-DiD) estimator that leverages temporal variation in the data to estimate unit-specific average treatment effects on the treated (ATT) with as few as two cross-sectional units. Under asymptotic parallel trends, limited anticipation, and temporal dependence conditions, the proposed DiD estimator is shown to be asymptotically normal. Provided at least two control units are available, the method is further complemented with an identification test that, unlike pre-trends tests, is more powerful and can detect violations of parallel trends in post-treatment periods. Empirical results using the DiD estimator suggest Benin's economy would have been 6.4% smaller on average over the 1993-2018 period had she not democratised.