Cited by 59Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesGlobal trade and economicsLabor market dynamics and wage inequality

Instrumental Variables and Causal Mechanisms: Unpacking The Effect of Trade on Workers and Voters

Open access
Dippel, Christian, Gold, Robert, Heblich, Stephan, Pinto, Rodrigo·2017·National Bureau of Economic Research

Abstract

Instrumental variables (IV) are a common means to identify treatment effects.But standard IV methods do not allow us to unpack the complex treatment effects that arise when a treatment and its outcome together cause a second outcome of interest.For example, IV methods have been used to show that import exposure to low-wage countries has adversely affected Western labor markets.Similarly, they have been used to show that import exposure has increased voter polarization.However, standard IV cannot estimate to what extent the latter is a consequence of the former.This paper proposes a new identification framework that allows us to do so, appealing to one additional identifying assumption without requiring additional instruments.The added identifying assumption can be relaxed, and bounds instead of point estimates can be derived.Applying this framework, we estimate that labor market adjustments explain most to all of the effect of import exposure on voting, thereby providing rigorous evidence that the correct policy response to voter polarization has to be focused on labor markets.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w23209

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Today, French and German regions more exposed to trade with low-wage countries have seen larger increases in vote shares for the far right.

    “Today, French and German regions more exposed to trade with low-wage countries have seen larger increases in vote shares for the far right (Dippel et al. 2017; Malgouyres 2017), British regions more exposed to trade with China voted more strongly in favor of Brexit (Colantone and Stanig 2018a), and EU regions more exposed to the Great Recession have seen a greater rise in voting for anti-establish”

    From Importing Political Polarization? The Electoral Consequences of Rising Trade Exposure (2020) · cites this paper as Dippel et al. 2017

    Section 4.2 says import exposure increased the extreme right’s vote share in the paper’s German data, and Section 3 identifies the trade studied as Germany’s trade with China and Eastern Europe. The cited clause also includes French regions, but this paper’s analysis does not cover France. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 58

  1. Art, D. (2007). Reacting to the radical right lessons from germany and austria. Party Politics 13(3), 331-349.
  2. Arzheimer, K. (2009). Contextual Factors and the Extreme Right Vote in Western Europe, 1980- 2002. American Journal of Political Science 53(2), 259-275.
  3. Autor, D. and D. Dorn (2013). The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market. American Economic Review 103(5), 1553-1597.
  4. Autor, D., D. Dorn, and G. Hanson (2013). The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States. American Economic Review 103(6), 2121-68.
  5. Autor, D., D. Dorn, and G. H. Hanson (2015). Untangling trade and technology: Evidence from local labour markets. The Economic Journal 125(584), 621-646.
  6. Bagues, M. and B. Esteve-Volart (2014). Politicians' Luck of the Draw: Evidence from the Spanish Christmas Lottery. Accepted at Journal of Political Economy.
  7. Baron, R. M. and D. A. Kenny (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psy- chological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology 51(6), 1173.
  8. Becker, S. O. and M.-A. Muendler (2015). Trade and tasks: an exploration over three decades in germany. Economic Policy 30(84), 589-641.
  9. Bloom, N., M. Draca, and J. Van Reenen (2016). Trade induced technical change? the impact of chinese imports on innovation, it and productivity. The Review of Economic Studies 83(1), 87-117.
  10. Blundell, R. and J. Powell (2003). Endogeneity in nonparametric and semiparametric regression models. In L. P. H. M. Dewatripont and S. J. Turnovsky (Eds.), Advances in Economics and Econo- metrics: Theory and Applications, Eighth World Congress, Volume 2. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Blundell, R. and J. Powell (2004, July). Endogeneity in semiparametric binary response models. Review of Economic Studies 71(3), 655-679.
  12. Brunner, E., S. L. Ross, and E. Washington (2011). Economics and policy preferences: causal evi- dence of the impact of economic conditions on support for redistribution and other ballot pro- posals. Review of Economics and Statistics 93(3), 888-906.
  13. Burgess, S., R. M. Daniel, A. S. Butterworth, and S. G. Thompson (2015). Network mendelian ran- domization: using genetic variants as instrumental variables to investigate mediation in causal pathways. International Journal of Epidemiology 44(2), 484-495.
  14. Conley, T. G., C. B. Hansen, and P. E. Rossi (2012). Plausibly exogenous. Review of Economics and Statistics 94(1), 260-272.
  15. Dauth, W., S. Findeisen, and J. Suedekum (2014). The Rise of the East and the Far East: German Labor Markets and Trade Integration. Journal of European Economic Association 12(6), 1643-1675.
  16. Dunn, G. and R. Bentall (2007). Modelling treatment-effect heterogeneity in randomized con- trolled trials of complex interventions (psychological treatments). Statistics in Medicine 26(26), 4719-4745.
  17. Duranton, G. and D. Puga (2005). From sectoral to functional urban specialisation. Journal of Urban Economics 57(2), 343-370.
  18. Dustmann, C., B. Fitzenberger, U. Sch önberg, and A. Spitz-Oener (2014). From sick man of europe to economic superstar: Germany's resurgent economy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 28(1), 167-188.
  19. Falck, O., R. Gold, and S. Heblich (2014). E-lections: Voting Behavior and the Internet. American Economic Review 104(7), 2238-65.
  20. Falck, O., S. Heblich, and A. Otto (2013). Agglomerationsvorteile in der wissensgesellschaft: Em- pirische evidenz f ür deutsche gemeinden. ifo Schnelldienst 66(3), 17-21.
  21. Falk, A., A. Kuhn, and J. Zweim üller (2011). Unemployment and Right-wing Extremist Crime. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics 113(2), 260-285.
  22. Frolich, M. and M. Huber (2017). Direct and indirect treatment effectscausal chains and mediation analysis with instrumental variables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), n/a-n/a.
  23. Geneletti, S. (2007). Identifying direct and indirect effects in a non-counterfactual framework. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 69(2), 199-215.
  24. Giuliano, P. and A. Spilimbergo (2014). Growing up in a recession. The Review of Economic Stud- ies 81(2), 787-817.
  25. Goos, M., A. Manning, and A. Salomons (2009). Job polarization in europe. The American Economic Review 99(2), 58-63.
  26. Hagan, J., H. Merkens, and K. Boehnke (1995). Delinquency and Disdain: Social Capital and the Control of Right-Wing Extremism Among East and West Berlin Youth. American Journal of Sociology 100(4), 1028-1052.
  27. Heckman, J. J. and R. Pinto (2015a). Causal analysis after Haavelmo. Econometric Theory 31(1), 115-151.
  28. Heckman, J. J. and R. Pinto (2015b). Econometric mediation analyses: Identifying the sources of treatment effects from experimentally estimated production technologies with unmeasured and mismeasured inputs. Econometric reviews 34(1-2), 6-31.
  29. Heckman, J. J., R. Pinto, and P. A. Savelyev (2013). Understanding the mechanisms through which an influential early childhood program boosted adult outcomes. American Economic Re- view 103(6), 2052-2086.
  30. Heckman, J. J. and E. J. Vytlacil (2005, May). Structural equations, treatment effects and economet- ric policy evaluation. Econometrica 73(3), 669-738.
  31. Hiscox, M. J. (2002). Commerce, coalitions, and factor mobility: Evidence from congressional votes on trade legislation. American Political Science Review 96(3), 593-608.
  32. Holmes, T. J. and J. J. Stevens (2014). An alternative theory of the plant size distribution, with geography and intra-and international trade. Journal of Political Economy 122(2), 369-421.
  33. Imai, K., L. Keele, D. Tingley, and T. Yamamoto (2011a). Unpacking the black box of causality: Learning about causal mechanisms from experimental and observational studies. American Po- litical Science Review 105(4), 765-789.
  34. Imai, K., L. Keele, D. Tingley, and T. Yamamoto (2011b). Unpacking the black box of causality: Learning about causal mechanisms from experimental and observational studies. American Po- litical Science Review 105, 765-789.
  35. Imai, K., L. Keele, and T. Yamamoto (2010). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science 25(1), 51-71.
  36. Jhun, M. A. (2015). Epidemiologic approaches to understanding mechanisms of cardiovascular diseases: genes, environment, and DNA methylation. Ph. D. thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
  37. Krueger, A. B. and J.-S. Pischke (1997). A Statistical Analysis of Crime Against Foreigners in Unified Germany. Journal of Human Resources 32(1), 182-209.
  38. Krugman, P. R. (2008). Trade and Wages, Reconsidered. Brookings Papers on Economic Activ- ity 2008(1), 103-154.
  39. Lubbers, M. and P. Scheepers (2001). European Sociological Review 17(4), 431-449.
  40. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Routledge.
  41. Malgouyres, C. (2017). The impact of chinese import competition on the local structure of employ- ment and wages: Evidence from france. Journal of Regional Science 57(3), 411-441.
  42. Mudde, C. (2000). The Ideology of the Extreme Right. Manchester University Press.
  43. Mughan, A., C. Bean, and I. McAllister (2003). Economic globalization, job insecurity and the populist reaction. Electoral Studies 22(4), 617-633.
  44. Mughan, A. and D. Lacy (2002). Economic Performance, Job Insecurity and Electoral Choice. British Journal of Political Science 32(3), 513-533.
  45. Pierce, J. R. and P. K. Schott (2016). The surprisingly swift decline of us manufacturing employ- ment. American Economic Review 106(7), 1632-62.
  46. Pinto, R. (2015). Selection bias in a controlled experiment: The case of Moving to Opportunity. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Chicago, Department of Economics.
  47. Robins, J. M. (2003). Semantics of causal dag models and the identification of direct and indirect effects. In N. L. P. J. Green, Hjort and S. Richardson (Eds.), Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, MR2082403, pp. 70-81. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  48. Robins, J. M. and S. Greenland (1992). Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 3(2), 143-155.
  49. Rodrik, D. (1995). Political economy of trade policy. Handbook of international economics 3(3), 1457- 1494.
  50. Rogowski, R. (1987). Political cleavages and changing exposure to trade. American Political Science Review 81(4), 1121-1137.
  51. Rosenbaum, P. R. and D. B. Rubin (1983, April). The central role of the propensity score in obser- vational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1), 41-55.
  52. Rubin, D. B. (2004). Direct and indirect causal effects via potential outcomes (with discussion). Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 31, 161-170.
  53. Scheve, K. F. and M. J. Slaughter (2001). What Determines Individual Trade-Policy Preferences? Journal of International Economics 54(2), 267-292.
  54. Small, D. S. (2012). Mediation analysis without sequential ignorability: using baseline covariates interacted with random assignment as instrumental variables. Journal of Statistical Research 46(2), 91-103.
  55. Sommer, B. (2008). Anti-capitalism in the name of ethno-nationalism: ideological shifts on the german extreme right. Patterns of Prejudice 42(3), 305-316.
  56. Ten Have, T. R., M. M. Joffe, K. G. Lynch, G. K. Brown, S. A. Maisto, and A. T. Beck (2007, Septem- ber). Causal mediation analyses with rank preserving models. Biometrics 63(3), 926-934.
  57. Voigtländer, N. and H.-J. Voth (2015). Taught to Hate: Nazi Indoctrination and Anti-Semitic Beliefs in Germany. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Forthcoming.
  58. Yamamoto, T. (2014, March). Identification and estimation of causal mediation effects with treat- ment noncompliance. Manuscript. Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dippel, C., Gold, R., Heblich, S., & Pinto, R.
Affiliations
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (DE)
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2017-03
OpenAlex
W2591803878
Cited by
59
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
Keywords
instrumental variables, causal mechanisms, trade effects, labor market, voter polarization, treatment effects, bounds, labor market adjustment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review