Econometrics

. In order to identify what are some of the household characteristics that account for differences in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in human and social capital in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in a community that faces high levels of violence, we run the followin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing regressions for children 7-12 of a country. Human Capitali = β0 + β1 AGECi + β2 AGEPi + β3 SEXCi + β2 SEXPi +β3 RACEi + + β4 EDUCPi + β5 OCCUPi + β6 NUMJOBSi + β7 NUMJOBPi + β8 FAMDINi + + β9 FAMSTRUCi + β10 NUMCHILDi + β11 SEXHEADi + εt (1) Social Capitali = β0 + β1 AGECi + β2 AGEPi + β3 SEXCi + β2 SEXPi +β3 RACEi + + β4 EDUCPi + β5 OCCUPi + β6 NUMJOBSi + β7 NUMJOBPi + β8 FAMDINi + + β9 FAMSTRUCi + β10 NUMCHILDi + β11 SEXHEADi + εt (2) where Human and Social Capital are the child reported action that reflects the existence or absence of human and social capital. AGEC and AGEP is the age of the child and of the parent respectively. SEXC and SEXP is the gender of the child and of the parent respectively (man=0 or woman=1), and RACE captures the ethnic group of child, typically the same than that of the parents (Ladin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ino=0 or in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">indigenous=1). EDUCP is the educational level achieved by the parents; the higher the ordin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inal number, the more years of education and experience the parent has. OCCUP is the occupation held by the head of the household. It is defin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ined as an ordin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inal variable, where the higher the number the lower the skills required. NUMJOBS and NUMBJOBP are the number of jobs the child or the parent hold, FAMDIN is the frequency with which family din" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inners take place in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the household, FAMSTRUC is a dummy that captures married couples, in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">includin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing widows and unions, versus non- married couples (divorced and sin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ingle parents) (not married=0 or Married=1.) NUMCHILD is the number of children livin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the household while SEXHEAD is the sex of the head of household. Tables 1 and 2 presents the estimation outcomes (please note that some of the numbers have been made up, so there is a repetition of them): Table 1, Human Capital Saw or suffered bullyin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing Sexually active Use drugs & alcohol Has problems with the Law Is in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">involved with gangs Protected siblin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ings again" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inst violence Quality of life Intercept -16.00* (5.13) -18.80* (13.75) -15.04** (7.53) -1.55 (3.25) -152.16 (97.80) -4.41 (7.96) 0.46*** (0.16) FAMSTRUC x EDUCP -0.07* (0.03) -0.14*** (0.03) -0.06* (0.001) -0.06* (0.03) -2.18*** (0.91) 2.1 (1.98) 0.12*** (0.01) FAMSTRUC -0.17*** (0.05) -0.09** (0.06) -0.08** (0.04) 0.02 (0.05) -0.11*** (0.06) 0.09* (0.02) 0.09* (0.02) EDUCP 0.01 (0.01) 0.09* (0.01) 0.12* (0.07) 0.04 (0.05) 0.11*** (0.05) 0.08 (0.06) 0.08 (0.02) RACE 3.2 (3.00) 2.11* (1.21) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) SEXC 1.39* (0.51) -3.03** (1.52) 2.1 (1.98) 1.37* (0.67) 2.1 (1.98) -2.62* (1.56) AGEC 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 3.45** (1.88) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) -2.26 (1.59) 0.16*** (0.05) FAMDIN 3.2 (2.9) -2.45* (0.97) -2.65* (0.88) 2.1 (1.98) -37.78* (22.24) -1.80* (0.83) 0.17* (0.07) EDUCP 2.5 (2.98) -1.6 (1.95) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 0.01*** (0.004) AGEP 2.0 (1.96) -0.59*** (0.34) 2.1 (1.98) -0.58* (0.14) 2.1 (1.98) -0.99* (0.49) 2.1 (1.98) NUMCHILD 1.99 (1.98) 2.2 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 0.88* (0.13) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) SEXHEAD -0.86* (0.32) 2.1 (1.99) -1.14*** (0.70) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) -1.51* (0.67) 2.1 (1.98) OCCUP 1.01* (0.25) 1.7 (1.68) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 2.1 (1.98) 0.01*** (.001) R2 72*** 82* 83* 88** 67*** 84* 81** Notes: OLS estimates, ***, **, * in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">indicate 1%, 5%, and 10% level of significance respectively. Table 2, Social Capital Family Violence Verbal Abuse Sexual Abuse Community violence Civic Responsibility Social Responsibility Intercept -10.03 (7.01) -3.36 (5.23) -1.54 (5.02) -1.60 (7.06) -0.22 (0.34) -0.38 (0.26) FAMSTRUC x EDUCP -2.41** (1.25) 3.6 (3.5) -0.14*** (0.03) 3.6 (3.5) 0.11*** (0.01) 0.03** (0.01) FAMSTRUC -0.17*** (0.05) -0.09** (0.06) -0.08** (0.04) 0.02 (0.05) 0.11*** (0.06) 0.09* (0.02) EDUCP 0.01 (0.01) 0.09* (0.01) 0.12* (0.07) 0.04 (0.05) 0.11*** (0.05) 0.08 (0.06) RACE 2.21** (1.22) 3.6 (3.5) 2.10* (1.21) -3.92*** (2.44) 3.6 (3.5) 0.11*** (0.06) SEXC -2.79** (1.32) -1.84* (1.04) -3.03** (1.51) 3.6 (3.5) 0.09*** (0.06) 3.6 (3.5) AGEC 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 0.23* (0.08) 0.20*** (0.06) FAMDIN 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 1.88*** (1.64) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) EDUCP 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 0.001** (0.0001) AGEP -3.6* (0.35) -0.6 (0.55) -0.60* (0.34) 3.6 (3.5) 0.17*** (0.11) 3.6* (0.5) NUMCHILD 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) -2.25* (0.9) 3.6* (0.5) 3.6* (0.5) SEXHEAD -1.09** (0.54) -0.98** (0.38) -0.94*** (0.42) -2.96* (1.25) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) OCCUP 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) 3.6 (3.5) -0.02** (0.01) 3.6 (3.5) LR 75** 60*** 74*** 79 77* 74* a. analyze the fin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ings. Is there support in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the literature for the choice of variables in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the regression? b. In order to examin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ine whether family structure, specifically marriage, is a multiplier factor in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the effectiveness of in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">interventions for development, a follow up regression was estimated. It compared the impact of the educational in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention alone vis a vis the impact of the in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention when the beneficiaries belonged to married households. To capture the in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention’s impact alone, it used fixed effects and controlled for all other household characteristics but family structure, and it use two dummies, one dummy for the in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention (if participated in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the educational in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention =1, 0 otherwise) and one dummy to capture married households (married and unions = 1, 0 otherwise.) Table 3 presents the estimations. Please analyze the fin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ings. Based on all the fin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ings, if you were to recommend some strategy to improve the educational in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">intervention efforts, what would you recommend?