Skip to main content

Table 9 The effect on the neighboring municipalities; separate samples

From: Evaluating place-based job creation programs in Japan

 

Treatment vs their neighbor

Control vs their neighbor

Neighbor of treatment vs neighbor of control

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Observed

Bootstrap

Observed

Bootstrap

Observed

Bootstrap

Observed

Bootstrap

Observed

Bootstrap

Observed

Bootstrap

Coef.

Std. err.

Coef.

Std. err.

Coef.

Std. err.

Coef.

Std. err.

Coef.

Std. err.

Coef.

Std. err.

All sectors

 Workers live in a

−0.018

0.032

−0.007

0.029

−0.027*

0.016

−0.017

0.027

0.018

0.041

0.024

0.040

 Workers work in b

−0.016

0.032

−0.006

0.035

−0.016

0.019

−0.007

0.028

0.009

0.036

0.015

0.041

General retail trade sector

 Sales

−0.056

0.181

−0.060

0.168

−0.057

0.110

−0.023

0.129

0.114

0.190

0.079

0.189

 Workers

−0.057**

0.027

−0.052*

0.031

−0.050

0.056

−0.030

0.070

0.014

0.066

0.007

0.059

 Establishments

−0.058**

0.026

−0.054**

0.025

−0.054

0.043

−0.037

0.054

0.026

0.043

0.022

0.048

Food and beverage retail trade sector

 Sales

−0.060

0.071

−0.056

0.071

−0.215*

0.119

−0.183

0.118

0.130

0.154

0.121

0.135

 Workers

−0.042

0.060

−0.037

0.061

−0.037

0.058

−0.018

0.064

−0.013

0.078

−0.020

0.080

 Establishments

−0.038

0.029

−0.033

0.029

−0.049

0.050

−0.033

0.047

0.020

0.036

0.018

0.035

Control variables

 Manufacturing share (lag)

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

 Trend in population density

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

 Observations c

731

731

474

474

177

177

 Observations d

587

587

327

327

176

176

  1. Each entry gives the difference-in-differences estimate of the program on the outcome presented in each row. Columns (1) and (2) indicate the effects of Japanese place-based program on the neighboring municipalities of the treatment group compared with the treatment group. Columns (3) and (4) indicate the effects of the program on the neighboring municipalities of control group compared with the control group. Columns (5) and (6) indicate the effects of the program on the neighboring municipalities of treatment group compared with the neighboring municipalities of the control group. Dependent variables are logged number of workers, sales, or numbers of establishments. Data from the population census in 2000, 2005, and 2010 for all sectors and from the census of commerce in 2002, 2007, and 2012 (to be more precise, the economic census in 2012. It covers the census of commerce) for a general retail trade sector and food and beverage retail trade sector. Estimations use a block bootstrap. A prefecture level is used as a block
  2. ** and * indicate significance at the 5 and 10% level, respectively
  3. aWorkers who live in the treatment/control municipalities bWorkers who work in the treatment/control municipalities cObservations for workers who live/work in the targeted municipalities using population census
  4. dObservations for workers and establishments in a retail trade sector using census of commerce. Observations for sales in a general retail trade sector are 538, 538, 313, 313, 161, and 161 for columns (1)–(6), respectively. Observations for sales in a food and beverage retail trade sector are 583, 583, 326, 326, 176, and 176 for columns (1)–(6), respectively