Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/330835 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2025
Series/Report no.: 
I4R Discussion Paper Series No. 271
Publisher: 
Institute for Replication (I4R), s.l.
Abstract: 
Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller's (2015) analysis of the costs of German reunification is a flagship study for the "synthetic control method" (SCM). Yet three issues can be identified. First, Abadie et al. remove countries that performed poorly in the 1990s from their donor pool, potentially biasing their results to amplify the negative impact of reunification on West Germany. Second, Abadie et al. use nominal GDP per capita to measure growth but report using real GDP per capita in 2002 USD. When the reported series is used, their results become more fragile: they remain statistically significant at p ﹤ 0.10, but the results of other robustness tests that Abadie et al. include are weaker. Third, even those fragile results reflect an arbitrary choice of reference year, given the instability that results from the spatial Gerschenkron effect: when Abadie et al.'s study is replicated using real GDP per capita series that are re-referenced using every year from 1960 to 2003, only 8 out of 44 synthetic controls generate treatment effects with p ﹤ 0.10.
Subjects: 
econometrics
German reunification
Gerschenkron effect
growth
synthetic control method (SCM)
JEL: 
C12
C22
C52
C80
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
927.93 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.