A Match Made in Maastricht: Estimating The Treatment Effect of the Euro On Trade

IF 1.5 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Joseph Kopecky
{"title":"A Match Made in Maastricht: Estimating The Treatment Effect of the Euro On Trade","authors":"Joseph Kopecky","doi":"10.1007/s11079-023-09723-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Why do estimates of the European Monetary Union (EMU) effect on trade vary so greatly? Rose (2017) shows that the largest factor determining the size of EMU trade estimates is the choice of sample, with studies using only European or rich countries finding smaller impacts than those using more complete trade datasets. I push this question one step further, asking instead: what is the appropriate comparison group with which to study the euro’s trade impact? Using a first stage estimation of selection into the EMU and a robust propensity score weighting estimator, I extend the work of Millimet and Tchernis (2009) to a larger dataset of countries and years, showing that gravity estimates of the euro effect on trade are smaller when sample truncation and weighting brings the differences in observable characteristics between EMU and non-EMU pairs close to zero. Utilizing a Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood approach, I find that estimates using this more robust estimator reflect the same pattern, but with significantly less initial upward bias. My work suggests that policy analysis in trade should be more careful to consider the comparability of “treated” and “control” observations, and more readily utilize propensity score methods as a data driven approach to rebalancing samples when differences across these groups are large.</p>","PeriodicalId":46980,"journal":{"name":"Open Economies Review","volume":"51 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Economies Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-023-09723-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Why do estimates of the European Monetary Union (EMU) effect on trade vary so greatly? Rose (2017) shows that the largest factor determining the size of EMU trade estimates is the choice of sample, with studies using only European or rich countries finding smaller impacts than those using more complete trade datasets. I push this question one step further, asking instead: what is the appropriate comparison group with which to study the euro’s trade impact? Using a first stage estimation of selection into the EMU and a robust propensity score weighting estimator, I extend the work of Millimet and Tchernis (2009) to a larger dataset of countries and years, showing that gravity estimates of the euro effect on trade are smaller when sample truncation and weighting brings the differences in observable characteristics between EMU and non-EMU pairs close to zero. Utilizing a Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood approach, I find that estimates using this more robust estimator reflect the same pattern, but with significantly less initial upward bias. My work suggests that policy analysis in trade should be more careful to consider the comparability of “treated” and “control” observations, and more readily utilize propensity score methods as a data driven approach to rebalancing samples when differences across these groups are large.

Abstract Image

马斯特里赫特的撮合:估计欧元对贸易的治疗效果
为什么对欧洲货币联盟(EMU)对贸易影响的估计差异如此之大?Rose(2017)表明,决定欧洲货币联盟贸易估算规模的最大因素是样本的选择,仅使用欧洲或富裕国家的研究发现,与使用更完整的贸易数据集的研究相比,影响较小。我把这个问题推进了一步,转而问:研究欧元贸易影响的合适比较对象是什么?使用进入欧洲货币联盟的第一阶段估计和稳健的倾向得分加权估计器,我将Millimet和Tchernis(2009)的工作扩展到更大的国家和年份数据集,表明当样本截断和加权使欧洲货币联盟和非欧洲货币联盟对之间的可观察特征差异接近于零时,欧元对贸易影响的重力估计较小。利用泊松伪极大似然方法,我发现使用这种更健壮的估计器的估计反映了相同的模式,但初始向上偏差明显减少。我的工作表明,贸易中的政策分析应该更仔细地考虑“处理”和“控制”观察结果的可比性,并且在这些群体之间的差异很大时,更容易利用倾向得分方法作为数据驱动的方法来重新平衡样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The topics covered in Open Economies Review include, but are not limited to, models and applications of (1) trade flows, (2) commercial policy, (3) adjustment mechanism to external imbalances, (4) exchange rate movements, (5) alternative monetary regimes, (6) real and financial integration, (7) monetary union, (8) economic development and (9) external debt. Open Economies Review welcomes original manuscripts, both theoretical and empirical, dealing with international economic issues or national economic issues that have transnational relevance. Furthermore, Open Economies Review solicits contributions bearing on specific events on important branches of the literature. Open Economies Review is open to any and all contributions, without preferences for any particular viewpoint or school of thought. Open Economies Review encourages interdisciplinary communication and interaction among researchers in the vast area of international and transnational economics. Authors will be expected to meet the scientific standards prevailing in their respective fields, and empirical findings must be reproducible. Regardless of degree of complexity and specificity, authors are expected to write an introduction, setting forth the nature of their research and the significance of their findings, in a manner accessible to researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: Open Econ Rev
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信