Skip Navigation


American Law and Economics Review Advance Access originally published online on April 16, 2008
American Law and Economics Review 2008 10(1):90-109; doi:10.1093/aler/ahn005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
10/1/90    most recent
ahn005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Listokin, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow K22 - Corporation and Securities Law
Right arrow G34 - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Law and Economics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Interpreting Empirical Estimates of the Effect of Corporate Governance

Yair Listokin

Yale Law School

Send correspondence to: Yair Listokin, Associate Professor, Yale Law School, PO Box 208215, New Haven, CT 06520-8215, USA; E-mail: yair.listokin{at}yale.edu.

JEL Classification: K22, G34


  Abstract

Empirical studies of corporate governance address potential endogeneity problems, but fail to place endogeneity in the context of a model and ignore the possibility of disparate treatment effects across companies. This paper tackles these defects. The model and analysis in the paper demonstrate that: (1) Valid and positive estimates for the effect of governance can only arise if there is random variation in governance and governance is systematically underproduced, or governance is chosen randomly without bias and the randomness under study concerns a subpopulation with below-average governance. (2) Governance models that correct for endogeneity using subsamples of firms, fixed effects, or instrumental variables estimates focus on subpopulations of companies that may have different responses to a governance treatment than the average firm.

I thank Ian Ayres, Anne Case, John Donohue III, Daniel Ho, Roberta Romano, Benjamin Sachs, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments and discussions. All errors are my own.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.