Identification and estimation of interventions using changes in inequality measures

This paper presents semiparametric estimators of changes in inequality measures of a dependent variable distribution taking into account the possible changes on the distributions of covariates. When we do not impose parametric assumptions on the conditional distribution of the dependent variable given covariates, this problem becomes equivalent to estimation of distributional impacts of interventions (treatment) when selection to the program is based on observable characteristics. The distributional impacts of a treatment will be calculated as differences in inequality measures of the potential outcomes of receiving and not receiving the treatment. These differences are called here Inequality Treatment Effects (ITE). The estimation procedure involves a first non-parametric step in which the probability of receiving treatment given covariates, the propensity-score, is estimated. Using the inverse probability weighting method to estimate parameters of the marginal distribution of potential outcomes, in the second step weighted sample versions of inequality measures are computed. Root-N consistency, asymptotic normality and semiparametric efficiency are shown for the semiparametric estimators proposed. A Monte Carlo exercise is performed to investigate the behavior in finite samples of the estimator derived in the paper. We also apply our method to the evaluation of a job training program.

Domestic violence in Brazil: social problems and legislative interventions

Recent statistical data confirms that domestic violence is a structural problem of exceptional gravity. We analyze the frequent legislative changes in Brazil since 2000 as a result of social pressure for protection of abused women. Only the Law 11.340 of 2006 was well received by lawyers, judges and the public opinion. We present the innovations and peculiarities of this statute and the allegations on unconstitutionality. We discuss cases of judicial review of this law and reject the arguments of unconstitutionality. That notwithstanding, we argue that penalization decisions is the wrong way from a criminological point of view because they do not take into consideration the desires and needs of the victims.