Measurement and Cross-Country Differences

19 in the second panel we report the results for

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ck [2003] for Sweden.19 ¨ In the second panel we report the results for specification (2) where our four outcomes for adoptees are run on the same variables for their adoptive and biological parents using the same format as before. The first three columns report the estimates for 19. The previous mobility models are also estimated for sons and daughters separately. The intergenerational transmissions for schooling are found to be very similar. The intergenerational transmissions for earnings and income are, however, somewhat larger for sons. A similar pattern is observed when we estimate these models on our samples of female and male adoptees. Fortin – Econ 560 Lecture 5B Sacerdote (2007) analyzes a new set of data on Korean American adoptees who were quasi-randomly assigned to adoptive families, placed by Holt International Children’s Services during 1964–1985 using a queuing (first-come first-served) policy. He uses a variance decomposition analysis of the share of outcome (Y) that is attributable to genetic inputs (G), shared (common) family environment (F) and unexplained factors or separate environment, (S), assumed to be uncorrelated: 2 2 2 2 Y G F S , 2 2 2 Dividing both sides by the variance in the outcome ( Y2 ) and defining h G / Y , 2 2 2 2 c 2 F / Y , and e 2 S / Y yields the standard BG (behavioral genetics) relationship: 1 h2 c2 e2 o The comparison of adoptive siblings, who share only the F component allow the identification of c 2 : Cov(Y1,Y2) = Cov(F1,F1) = Var(F1) = c2. o Assuming that nonadoptive siblings share half of the same genetic endowment and the same common environment, the comparison of the non-adoptive siblings allow the identification of half G plus F components: Fortin – Econ 560 Lecture 5B o Cov(Y1,Y2) = Cov(G1 + F1 + S1, G2 + F2 + S2)= Cov(G1 + F1, 1⁄2G1 + F1) = 1⁄2h2 + c2. He also explicitly estimates of treatment effects from assignment to a high education, small family and finds positive and significantly effects on education, and drinking but not on income, which is however not...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 02/26/2014 for the course ECON 560 at UBC.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online