Social Impact Assessment in Innovation Projects via STATA, Methods:: Causal Inference, Randomization, Propensity Score Matching, and Double-Difference

Authors

Juan Mejía-Trejo
Profesor Investigador Titular B CUCEA-Universidad de Guadalajara
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-1943

Keywords:

social impact, innovation, STATA, double-difference, propensity score matching, randomization, causal inference

Synopsis

In the business and industrial world, the design and implementation of projects typically take into account the economic, financial, and even political or environmental impact when introducing innovations. However, in the first two decades of the 21st century, various events have demonstrated that the evaluation of social impact on well-being generation is of vital importance.

In fact, in the times of the new normality envisioned as the Post-COVID-19 era, this becomes particularly relevant since all policies and actions undertaken by companies and governments must have the necessary endorsement of a social impact evaluation when introducing innovations.

For this reason, the work: "SOCIAL IMPACT EVALUATION IN INNOVATION PROJECTS VIA STATA. Methods: Causal Inference, Randomization, Propensity Score Matching, and Double Difference," Volume 1 is aimed at describing both to those familiar and unfamiliar with the topic, what social impact is, its characteristics, conditions, and implications, the main methods used to calculate it as well as the opportunities that arise in the Post-COVID-19 era, which demands that innovation resources and actions designed and implemented reflect high standards of social impact that foster well-being, particularly in emerging countries.

To achieve this, this work is divided into a collection of two volumes, corresponding to Volume I:

Chapter 1. Basic Concepts. This chapter is aimed at explaining what social impacts are, the reasons for evaluating them, the differentiation between monitoring vs. evaluation, the indicators of both, what a results-based monitoring entails, and its configuration. This allows for a better definition of the idea of impact evaluations, their relationship as studies of efficacy and effectiveness, the implications of operational evaluation as well as their qualitative and quantitative impact characteristics, in addition to the reference point where impact evaluation is required, either prospectively or retrospectively. Conducting any social impact evaluation for the introduction of innovations requires recognizing the treatment and control groups, which necessitates solving the problem of determining the counterfactual groups; with and without comparisons as well as their relationship with bias. A case description is provided, explaining selection bias in an ex-post scenario and explaining the characteristics that accompany it, such as process evaluations and project evaluations, the importance of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis as well as ethics in social impact evaluation in the introduction of innovations.

Chapter 2. Preparation, causal inference, and counterfactuals.

Given the preparation of treatment and control groups, this chapter is designed to consider the steps that serve the construction of counterfactual scenarios that enable groups to explain the construction of a theory of change, explain the links in a results chain, the techniques that facilitate the specification of evaluation questions, the selection of outcome and performance indicators, and to create a data-based checklist for the indicators. This equips the researcher to perform causal inference, describe and estimate counterfactuals, through two case studies with which the chapter concludes.

Chapter 3. Randomization. It is from this chapter until chapter 7, where different techniques based on STATA 14 software are introduced, so it is recommended, if not familiar with the software, to start with the Appendix: Introduction to STATA. This will allow you to understand the operating rules as well as to access the example case files that will be discussed and that are hosted at the link: [link]. Thus, Chapter 3 will allow the reader to understand the characteristics of random assignment, advantages and disadvantages of its use, the recommended conditions for its application, the ethical implications, the different randomization methods that exist, checklists to carry it out as well as an example with STATA for understanding its use.

Chapter 4. Propensity Score Matching (PSM). It explains to the more avid reader, what this technique is and does, the assumptions and rules that must be met for its application, steps to achieve it as well as the use of complementary techniques. Its advantages and disadvantages of use are debated and it is completed with an example in STATA to check its understanding of use.

Chapter 5. Double Difference (DD). The chapter is designed to explain the method, what it is, how it is used, what happens in it through the use of fixed effects panel, how to implement it, advantages and disadvantages, its usefulness, trends, alternative models, the possibility of combining it with PSM, adjustments, limitations, concluding with an example in STATA to check its understanding of use.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Juan Mejía-Trejo, Profesor Investigador Titular B CUCEA-Universidad de Guadalajara

Dr. Juan Mejía Trejo
He is born in 1964 in CDMX, México.
As professional experience:
1986-1987. Quality Department Control in KOKAI Electrónica S.A.
1987-2008. Former Internal Plant Exploitation Manager at Teléfonos de México S.A.B. Western Division.
As academic experience :
1987. He earned his degree in Communications and Electronics Engineering from the Escuela Superior de Ingeniería Mecánica y Eléctrica, Instituto Politécnico Nacional (ESIME at the IPN)
2004. He earned his master’s in Telecommunications Business Administration from INTTELMEX and France Telecom.
2010. He earned his doctorate in Administrative Sciences from the Escuela Superior de Comercio y Administración (ESCA at the IPN)
2011.He is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigadores (SNI) Level I of the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) , México.
2010 to the present, he is Titular Research Professor B at the Department of Marketing and International Business at the Universidad de Guadalajara, México.
2018-2020. He earned his master’s in Valuing Business in the Centro de Valores S.C. México.
2019.He earned Level II of the SNI/CONACYT
2015-2022.He earned the Coordination of the Doctorate in Management Sciences at the Universidad de Guadalajara.

Currently, he is the founder of the AMIDI (Academia Mexicana de Investigacion y Docencia en Innovación SC) (https://amidi.mx/) as well as founder and editor-in-chief of the scientific journal Scientia et PRAXIS (https://scientiaetpraxis .amidi.mx/index.php/sp)
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-1943

His line of research is Innovation Management, publishing articles and books that can be found on the Internet.
Email: jmejia@cucea.udg.mx

Dr. Juan Mejía Trejo
Nacido en la CDMX (1964).México.
Con experiencia profesional:
1986-1987. Departamento de Control de Calidad KOKAI Electrónica S.A.
1987-2008.Gerente de Explotación de Planta Interna en Teléfonos de México S.A.B. División Occidente.
Con experiencia académica:
1987 obtiene su licenciatura en Ingeniero en Comunicaciones y Electrónica de la Escuela Superior de Ingeniería Mecánica y Eléctrica del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (ESIME del IPN)
2004 egresa como Maestro en Administración Empresas de Telecomunicaciones por el INTTELMEX y France Telecom.
2010 obtiene su grado como Dr. en Ciencias Administrativas de la Escuela Superior de Comercio y Administración (ESCA del IPN)
2011 Ingresa al Sistema Nacional de investigadores Nivel I del CONACYT
2010 a la actualidad es Profesor Investigador Titular B en el Departamento de Mercadotecnia y Negocios Internacionales, de la Universidad de Guadalajara, México.
2018-2020 egresa como Maestro en Valuación de Negocios en Marcha por el Centro de Valores , S.C. México.
2019 Actualización en el Sistema Nacional de Investigadores como Nivel II
2015 a 2022 Coordinador del Doctorado de Ciencias de la Administración de CUCEA de la Universidad de Guadalajara.

2019 a la fecha, es fundador de la AMIDI (Academia Mexicana de Investigación y Docencia en Innovación SC) (https://amidi.mx/) así como fundador y editor responsable de la revista científica Scientia et PRAXIS (https://scientiaetpraxis.amidi.mx/index.php/sp)

Línea de Investigación la Administración de la Innovación, realizando publicaciones de artículos y libros localizables en Internet.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-1943
email: jmejia@cucea.udg.mx

References

Abadie, A. J.; Imbens, G. (2008). On the failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators. Econometrica 7 (6): 1537-1557

Abadie, A. J.; Angrist, D.; Imbens, G. W. (2002). “Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Effect of Subsidized Training on the Quantiles of Trainee Earnings. Econometrica 70 (1): 91–117.

AIEI (2015). Evaluación de Impacto Social: Lineamientos para la evaluación y gestión de impactos sociales de poryectos. Asocia- ción Internacional para la Evaluación de Impactos. Banco Intera- mericano de desarrollo, en: https://www.iaia.org/pdf/Evaluacion- Impacto-Social-Lineamientos.pdf

Bamberger, M.; Rao, V. y Woolcock, M. (2010). Using Mixed Methods in Monitoring and Evaluation: Experiences from International Devel- opment. Documento de trabajo de investigación de políticas Núm. 5245. Washington, D.C.: BancoMundial.

Becker, S. O. e Ichino (A). (2002a). Stata programs for ATT estimation based on propensity score matching, en: http://sobecker.userweb. mwn.de/pscore.html

Becker, S. O. e Ichino, A. (2002b). Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Based on Propensity Scores. Stata Journal 2 (4): 358–77.

Bell, B.; Blundell, R. y Van Reenen, J.(1999). Getting the Unemployed Back to Work: An Evaluation of the New Deal Proposals. Interna- tional Tax and Public Finance 6 (3): 339–60.

Bernal, R. y Peña X. (2011). Guía práctica para la evaluación de impacto. Perú: Universidad de los Andes: Facultad de Economía.

Bertrand, M.; Dufl E. y Mullainathan, S. (2004). How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates? Quarterly Journal of Economics 119 (1): 249–75.

Downloads

Published

June 30, 2021

Details about this monograph

ISBN-13 (15)

978-607-571-166-9

doi

10.55965/abib.9786075711669.2021a