arXiv · 2609.01467
Which Policy Works, and Where? Estimation and Inference for State-Level Treatment Effects in Difference-in-Differences
Abstract
Policies with a common objective and implementation date may differ in details or context. We distinguish the aggregate average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) from sub-aggregate ATTs defined by implementation cohort, jurisdiction, period, or policy type. UN-DID and DID-INT, two DiD estimators that construct jurisdiction-by-time effects, estimate these ATTs under parallel-trends conditions matched to the aggregation. In CPS placebo-law simulations, randomization inference is generally well-sized, though some jurisdiction-specific tests are conservative. The jackknife can be undefined for sub-aggregate ATTs; when defined, it over-rejects with few treated or comparison jurisdictions. Estimands and inference methods should match the policy question and implementation setting.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Nichole Austin, Sunny R. Karim, Erin Strumpf, Matthew D. Webb. 2026-09-01. Which Policy Works, and Where? Estimation and Inference for State-Level Treatment Effects in Difference-in-Differences. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.01467
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.