A recent study finds that Olympic Games host countries experience significant positive, lasting effects on exports. They interpret their results as an indication that countries use the hosting of such events to signal openness and competitiveness. The authors challenge these empirical findings on the grounds that a comparison of structurally different and nonmatching groups of countries might suffer from a selection bias. The authors demonstrate that with an appropriate matching and treatment methodology, the significant Olympic effect disappears.
BeckerS.IchinoA. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. Stata Journal, 2, 358–377.
2.
CaliendoM.KopeinigS. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22, 31–72.
3.
HeckmannJ.IchimuraH.ToddP. (1997). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Review of Economic Studies, 64, 605–654.
4.
RoseA.SpiegelM. (2011). The olympic effect. Economic Journal, 121, 652–677.
5.
RosenbaumP.RubinD. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.
