Cross country evidence within germany evidence

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: nd ε jt is a disturbance term. Cross-country evidence Within-Germany Evidence Reforms in Germany Conclusion Cross-Country Evidence–Model The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution Daron Acemoglu, Davide Cantoni, Simon Johnson, James Robinson Ij is the treatment variable - years of French occupation, or a dummy. Dt is a year dummy such that Dt = 1 for period t and 0 otherwise. The term ∑t ∈T αt · Dt · Ij estimates a potentially differential growth effect for every time period in the set T . The dates in T post are post-treatment, while those in T pre are just before treatment, thus their inclusion will be our check for pre-existing trends. Introduction Historical background Cross-country evidence Within-Germany Evidence Reforms in Germany Conclusion The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution Table 4 Country Level Impact of French Revolution: Urbanization Dependent variable: Urbanization (Percent living in cities above 5000 inh.) FE OLS FE OLS FE OLS Weighted (1) (2) (3) (4) French Revolution x 1750 year dummy French Revolution x 1800 year dummy French Revolution x 1850 year dummy French Revolution x 1900 year dummy -0.161 [0.091] -0.189 [0.116] -0.236 [0.154] 0.899 [0.382] -2.625 [1.292] -4.832 [1.520] -3.835 [2.385] 9.521 [6.154] -1.026 [2.121] -0.969 [2.179] -2.145 [2.218] 13.081 [5.162] -0.235 [0.090] -0.200 [0.169] -0.289 [0.207] 0.662 [0.513] p-value for joint significance ”French Revolution” after 1800 0.001 0.037 0.006 0.000 Years of French Presence French Rev. Armies Dummy Napoleonic Control Dummy Years of French Presence 202 41 0.87 202 41 0.86 202 41 0.88 202 41 0.85 Definition of treatment Observations Countries R-squared Daron Acemoglu, Davide Cantoni, Simon Johnson, James Robinson Introduction Historical background Cross-country evidence Within-Germany Evidence Reforms in Germany Conclusion Cross-Country Evidence–Urbanization Tables 4-6 show the basic urbanization results. The effect is negative and mostly insignificant in 1850 ˆ α1850 = −0.236 (s.e. 0.154), but significant by 1900: ˆ 1900 = 0.899 (s.e. 0.382) . α This means that for every year of French presence you get 0.899 % points more urbanization in 1900 compared to an untreated country. If the French stayed for 20 years, like in Belgium or the Rhineland, this translates into 18% points more. This is a large effect (about one s.d. in 1900). Several robustness checks. The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution Daron Acemoglu, Davide Cantoni, Simon Johnson, James Robinson Introduction Historical background Cross-country evidence Within-Germany Evidence Reforms in Germany Conclusion The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution Table 5 Country Level Impact of French Revolution: Urbanization Dependent variable: Urbanization (Percent living in cities above 5000 inh.) FE OLS FE OLS FE OLS FE OLS (1) (2) (3) (4) FE OLS (5) French Revolution x 1750 year dummy French Revolution x 1800 year dummy French Revolution x...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 02/28/2014 for the course ECON 2328 at Harvard.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online