CREAT: Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool

Papers Containing Tag(s): 'Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board'

The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
Click here to search again

Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search

American Community Survey - 138

Federal Statistical Research Data Center - 134

Disclosure Review Board - 129

North American Industry Classification System - 125

Internal Revenue Service - 118

Longitudinal Business Database - 117

Protected Identification Key - 90

Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics - 81

Social Security Administration - 78

Current Population Survey - 78

Center for Economic Studies - 71

Bureau of Labor Statistics - 68

National Science Foundation - 65

Social Security Number - 63

Employer Identification Numbers - 60

Decennial Census - 60

Ordinary Least Squares - 60

Social Security - 53

National Bureau of Economic Research - 48

Business Register - 44

W-2 - 43

Person Validation System - 42

Federal Reserve Bank - 38

Economic Census - 37

Business Dynamics Statistics - 34

2010 Census - 34

Census Bureau Business Register - 33

Bureau of Economic Analysis - 33

Annual Survey of Manufactures - 29

Total Factor Productivity - 28

Census Numident - 28

Survey of Income and Program Participation - 27

Standard Industrial Classification - 26

Department of Housing and Urban Development - 26

Federal Reserve System - 25

Alfred P Sloan Foundation - 25

Person Identification Validation System - 25

Census of Manufacturing Firms - 24

Adjusted Gross Income - 24

Master Address File - 24

Census of Manufactures - 24

Office of Management and Budget - 23

COVID-19 - 23

County Business Patterns - 22

Personally Identifiable Information - 22

Department of Homeland Security - 21

Metropolitan Statistical Area - 21

Housing and Urban Development - 21

Longitudinal Firm Trade Transactions Database - 20

Department of Economics - 20

Annual Business Survey - 20

Patent and Trademark Office - 18

Herfindahl Hirschman Index - 18

Unemployment Insurance - 18

Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages - 18

Survey of Business Owners - 18

Accommodation and Food Services - 18

Special Sworn Status - 18

Quarterly Workforce Indicators - 18

Research Data Center - 18

Cobb-Douglas - 17

Technical Services - 16

National Center for Health Statistics - 16

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - 16

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics - 16

Earned Income Tax Credit - 16

Chicago Census Research Data Center - 16

Data Management System - 16

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - 15

Individual Characteristics File - 15

Cornell University - 15

University of Maryland - 15

PSID - 15

Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers - 15

Census Bureau Longitudinal Business Database - 14

Department of Labor - 14

1940 Census - 14

International Trade Research Report - 14

Census Household Composition Key - 14

Board of Governors - 13

National Institutes of Health - 13

Service Annual Survey - 13

National Institute on Aging - 13

Indian Health Service - 13

Environmental Protection Agency - 12

University of Chicago - 12

Department of Education - 12

Retail Trade - 12

Integrated Public Use Microdata Series - 12

General Accounting Office - 12

ASEC - 12

Small Business Administration - 12

American Economic Association - 12

SSA Numident - 11

Arts, Entertainment - 11

Census Edited File - 11

Some Other Race - 11

Detailed Earnings Records - 11

Postal Service - 11

World Trade Organization - 10

Supreme Court - 10

Wholesale Trade - 10

Securities and Exchange Commission - 10

Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs - 10

Citizenship and Immigration Services - 10

University of Michigan - 10

Harmonized System - 10

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth - 10

AKM - 10

Generalized Method of Moments - 10

Disability Insurance - 10

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - 10

New York University - 10

Cornell Institute for Social and Economic Research - 10

Department of Agriculture - 9

European Union - 9

Energy Information Administration - 9

IQR - 9

Stanford University - 9

Health and Retirement Study - 9

National Employer Survey - 9

United States Census Bureau - 9

MAFID - 9

American Housing Survey - 9

NBER Summer Institute - 9

Census Bureau Person Identification Validation System - 9

MAF-ARF - 9

Core Based Statistical Area - 9

UC Berkeley - 8

Census Bureau Master Address File - 8

Integrated Longitudinal Business Database - 8

Educational Services - 8

Social and Economic Supplement - 8

COVID - 8

Russell Sage Foundation - 8

Customs and Border Protection - 8

Characteristics of Business Owners - 8

Health Care and Social Assistance - 8

Sloan Foundation - 8

Standard Statistical Establishment List - 8

Master Beneficiary Record - 8

Computer Assisted Personal Interview - 8

Social Science Research Institute - 8

Indian Housing Information Center - 8

Pew Research Center - 8

Business Formation Statistics - 8

Herfindahl-Hirschman - 7

National Income and Product Accounts - 7

Department of Energy - 7

Employer Characteristics File - 7

Oil and Gas Extraction - 7

Initial Public Offering - 7

Survey of Consumer Finances - 7

Company Organization Survey - 7

Standard Occupational Classification - 7

Occupational Employment Statistics - 7

Nonemployer Statistics - 7

NUMIDENT - 7

Federal Register - 7

Business R&D and Innovation Survey - 7

Business Research and Development and Innovation Survey - 7

Professional Services - 7

Medicaid Services - 7

Workforce Information Council Administrative Wage Record Enhancement Study Group - 7

Paycheck Protection Program - 7

Employment History File - 7

Population Estimates Program - 7

Selective Service System - 7

Statistics Canada - 7

Department of Justice - 7

Survey of Industrial Research and Development - 6

National Academy of Sciences - 6

Public Administration - 6

Michigan Institute for Teaching and Research in Economics - 6

Research and Development - 6

Legal Form of Organization - 6

Yale University - 6

CPS ASEC - 6

Department of State - 6

IBM - 6

Consumer Expenditure Survey - 6

Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Industries - 6

Urban Institute - 6

Centers for Medicare - 6

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - 6

Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement - 6

Duke University - 6

Journal of Economic Literature - 6

Council of Economic Advisers - 6

Retirement History Survey - 6

Information and Communication Technology Survey - 6

National Opinion Research Center - 5

Department of Defense - 5

Census of Retail Trade - 5

Ohio State University - 5

Geographic Information Systems - 5

Census Bureau Business Dynamics Statistics - 5

MTO - 5

Opportunity Atlas - 5

Management and Organizational Practices Survey - 5

National Establishment Time Series - 5

Agriculture, Forestry - 5

Federal Poverty Level - 5

Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies - 5

Center for Administrative Records Research - 5

Economic Research Service - 5

Federal Insurance Contribution Act - 5

Form W-2 - 5

Harvard University - 5

Boston College - 5

Administrative Records - 5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards - 5

PIKed - 5

Federal Reserve Board of Governors - 5

Michigan Institute for Data Science - 5

George Mason University - 5

Public Use Micro Sample - 5

LEHD Program - 5

North American Industry Classi - 5

Center for Research in Security Prices - 4

National Research Council - 4

Cumulative Density Function - 4

Code of Federal Regulations - 4

Office of Personnel Management - 4

Department of Health and Human Services - 4

Minnesota Population Center - 4

North American Free Trade Agreement - 4

Columbia University - 4

United Nations - 4

Federal Statistical System - 4

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation - 4

University of Toronto - 4

American Immigration Council - 4

IZA - 4

Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications - 4

Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation - 4

Net Present Value - 4

International Trade Commission - 4

Limited Liability Company - 4

Regression Discontinuity Design - 4

Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey - 4

Society of Labor Economists - 4

Princeton University - 4

Federal Emergency Management Agency - 4

2SLS - 4

State Energy Data System - 4

TFPR - 4

European Commission - 4

World Bank - 4

Kauffman Foundation - 4

LODES - 4

University of California - 3

Employer-Household Dynamics - 3

Computer Assisted Telephone Interviews and Computer Assisted Personal Interviews - 3

Census of Services - 3

University of Texas - 3

Survey of Manufacturing Technology - 3

Commodity Flow Survey - 3

Food and Nutrition Service - 3

Longitudinal Research Database - 3

Brookings Institution - 3

Toxics Release Inventory - 3

Penn State University - 3

Harvard Business School - 3

CDF - 3

Quarterly Journal of Economics - 3

American Economic Review - 3

Composite Person Record - 3

Business Services - 3

Bureau of Labor - 3

Department of Commerce - 3

Master Earnings File - 3

TFPQ - 3

Linear Probability Models - 3

General Social Survey - 3

Current Employment Statistics - 3

Federal Trade Commission - 3

Georgetown University - 3

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey - 3

Journal of Econometrics - 3

Local Employment Dynamics - 3

Foreign Direct Investment - 3

COMPUSTAT - 3

University of Minnesota - 3

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality - 3

University of California Los Angeles - 3

Guzman and Stern - 3

John Voorheis - 22

Lucia Foster - 20

John Haltiwanger - 17

John M. Abowd - 14

Nathan Goldschlag - 12

Emin Dinlersoz - 11

J. David Brown - 11

Fariha Kamal - 10

Jonathan Eggleston - 10

Sonya R. Porter - 10

Catherine Buffington - 9

Moises Yi - 9

Lars Vilhuber - 8

Maggie R. Jones - 8

Kevin Rinz - 8

Leah R. Clark - 7

Cristina Tello-Trillo - 7

Zachary Kroff - 7

Cheryl Grim - 6

Zoltan Wolf - 6

Jay Stewart - 6

Martha Stinson - 6

Randall Akee - 6

Jonathan Colmer - 6

Lawrence Warren - 6

Kevin L. McKinney - 6

Misty L. Heggeness - 6

Joseph Staudt - 5

Ariel J. Binder - 5

Nikolas Zolas - 5

Thomas B. Foster - 5

Renuka Bhaskar - 5

Kendall Houghton - 5

Marta Murray-Close - 5

Emek Basker - 4

G. Jacob Blackwood - 4

Cindy Cunningham - 4

Sabrina Wulff Pabilonia - 4

Ryan Monarch - 4

Nicholas Bloom - 4

Kristina McElheran - 4

Erik Brynjolfsson - 4

Teresa C. Fort - 4

Sabrina T. Howell - 4

Charles Hokayem - 4

Eva Lyubich - 4

Amanda Eng - 4

Reed Walker - 4

Gloria G. Aldana - 4

Nikolas Pharris-Ciurej - 4

Leticia Fernandez - 4

Danielle H. Sandler - 4

Andrew Penner - 3

Michelle Spiegel - 3

Dominic A. Smith - 3

Cody Tuttle - 3

Rachel Nesbit - 3

Kristin Sandusky - 3

Ethan Lewis - 3

Robert Ashmead - 3

Daniel Kifer - 3

Philip Leclerc - 3

Rolando A. Rodríguez - 3

Tamara Adams - 3

David Darais - 3

Sourya Dey - 3

Simson L. Garfinkel - 3

Scott Moore - 3

Ramy N. Tadros - 3

Yoshiki Ando - 3

Steven J. Davis - 3

Emilia Simeonova - 3

David Card - 3

Jesse Rothstein - 3

Peter Schott - 3

Sean Wang - 3

Seula Kim - 3

Richard Mansfield - 3

Ethan Krohn - 3

Mary Munro - 3

Jennifer Withrow - 3

Suvy Qin - 3

Kyle Handley - 3

Timothy R. Wojan - 3

Adela Luque - 3

Carl Lieberman - 3

Garrett Anstreicher - 3

Gale Boyd - 3

Matthew Doolin - 3

James M. Noon - 3

James P. Ziliak - 3

Parag Mahajan - 3

Sharon R. Ennis - 3

Matthew Staiger - 3

J. Daniel Kim - 3

Sarah Miller - 3

Laura Wherry - 3

Javier Miranda - 3

Shawn Klimek - 3

Victoria Udalova - 3

earnings - 61

employed - 60

employ - 58

labor - 58

population - 57

workforce - 56

survey - 53

recession - 49

respondent - 44

ethnicity - 42

market - 35

hispanic - 35

disparity - 34

innovation - 33

manufacturing - 33

employee - 33

revenue - 32

minority - 32

immigrant - 32

economist - 31

disadvantaged - 31

census bureau - 30

sector - 30

payroll - 30

growth - 28

investment - 28

entrepreneur - 28

poverty - 27

earner - 27

industrial - 26

economically - 26

socioeconomic - 26

ethnic - 26

entrepreneurship - 26

estimating - 26

company - 26

disclosure - 26

resident - 26

statistical - 25

racial - 25

macroeconomic - 24

export - 24

irs - 24

salary - 24

expenditure - 24

immigration - 24

patent - 23

gdp - 23

census data - 23

enterprise - 23

race - 23

sale - 22

production - 22

tax - 22

hiring - 21

neighborhood - 21

econometric - 21

venture - 20

trend - 20

residence - 20

agency - 20

worker - 19

demand - 19

housing - 19

spillover - 19

welfare - 19

import - 18

financial - 18

percentile - 18

data census - 18

finance - 18

heterogeneity - 18

unemployed - 18

data - 18

1040 - 17

report - 17

enrollment - 17

rent - 17

migrant - 17

quarterly - 16

intergenerational - 16

entrepreneurial - 16

segregation - 16

incentive - 16

endogeneity - 16

technological - 15

inventory - 15

patenting - 15

occupation - 15

relocation - 15

loan - 15

use census - 15

eligibility - 15

corporation - 15

family - 15

citizen - 15

exporter - 14

impact - 14

state - 14

residential - 14

job - 13

earn - 13

record - 13

investor - 13

discrimination - 13

microdata - 13

taxpayer - 13

wealth - 12

graduate - 12

proprietor - 12

rural - 12

funding - 12

hire - 12

establishment - 12

datasets - 12

federal - 12

innovate - 11

migration - 11

aggregate - 11

imputation - 11

census responses - 11

importer - 11

estimation - 11

manufacturer - 11

black - 11

researcher - 11

medicaid - 11

bias - 11

trading - 10

monopolistic - 10

acquisition - 10

prevalence - 10

enrolled - 10

retirement - 10

incorporated - 10

census employment - 10

parent - 10

employment growth - 10

white - 10

shipment - 9

innovative - 9

invention - 9

innovating - 9

bank - 9

debt - 9

eligible - 9

census disclosure - 9

income data - 9

productivity growth - 9

efficiency - 9

parental - 9

child - 9

coverage - 9

proprietorship - 9

assessed - 9

home - 9

renter - 9

community - 9

pandemic - 9

metropolitan - 9

lender - 9

employment earnings - 9

financing - 9

household surveys - 9

organizational - 9

native - 9

urban - 9

migrate - 9

profit - 9

geographically - 9

filing - 9

environmental - 9

emission - 9

census household - 9

mexican - 9

exporting - 8

exogeneity - 8

relocate - 8

adoption - 8

commerce - 8

mortgage - 8

ssa - 8

labor markets - 8

poorer - 8

multinational - 8

supplier - 8

imported - 8

borrower - 8

lending - 8

stock - 8

produce - 8

productive - 8

startup - 8

city - 8

migrating - 8

dependent - 8

pollution - 8

technology - 7

regress - 7

accounting - 7

borrowing - 7

equity - 7

fund - 7

analysis - 7

study - 7

mortality - 7

economic census - 7

retailer - 7

wholesale - 7

productivity dispersion - 7

generation - 7

homeowner - 7

insurance - 7

latino - 7

segregated - 7

price - 7

consumption - 7

tariff - 7

investing - 7

invest - 7

census survey - 7

subsidy - 7

employment statistics - 7

mobility - 7

reside - 7

citizenship - 7

banking - 7

confidentiality - 7

woman - 7

saving - 7

regional - 7

competitor - 7

workers earnings - 7

product - 6

exported - 6

shift - 6

unemployment rates - 6

creditor - 6

family income - 6

parents income - 6

sampling - 6

university - 6

opportunity - 6

associate - 6

institutional - 6

productivity measures - 6

warehousing - 6

database - 6

labor statistics - 6

maternal - 6

suburb - 6

asian - 6

propensity - 6

rurality - 6

founder - 6

credit - 6

importing - 6

earnings employees - 6

2010 census - 6

prospect - 6

security - 6

growth productivity - 6

innovator - 6

employment estimates - 6

employment data - 6

workplace - 6

employment trends - 6

leverage - 6

provided census - 6

epa - 6

pollution exposure - 6

sectoral - 6

census estimates - 6

monopolistically - 6

pollutant - 6

policymakers - 6

birth - 6

research - 6

custom - 5

trader - 5

merger - 5

specialization - 5

patented - 5

layoff - 5

borrow - 5

disability - 5

www census - 5

income white - 5

average - 5

wage gap - 5

educated - 5

measures productivity - 5

aggregate productivity - 5

spending - 5

subsidiary - 5

retail - 5

merchandise - 5

degree - 5

nonemployer businesses - 5

decade - 5

education - 5

house - 5

income housing - 5

adopt - 5

indian - 5

benefit - 5

applicant - 5

international trade - 5

foreign - 5

firms export - 5

multinational firms - 5

commodity - 5

risk - 5

sociology - 5

effects employment - 5

productivity estimates - 5

productivity shocks - 5

factory - 5

business startups - 5

region - 5

unobserved - 5

longitudinal - 5

census records - 5

survey households - 5

population survey - 5

geographic - 5

wage growth - 5

household income - 5

income households - 5

income children - 5

immigrant workers - 5

globalization - 5

public - 5

concentration - 5

exposure - 5

ownership - 5

linked census - 5

outsourced - 5

estimates census - 5

surveys censuses - 5

research census - 5

employing - 5

gender - 5

medicare - 5

externality - 5

industry concentration - 5

regressing - 5

estimator - 5

industry productivity - 5

regulation - 5

assimilation - 5

classified - 5

census research - 5

reporting - 5

statistician - 5

regulatory - 4

crime - 4

tech - 4

advancement - 4

innovation patenting - 4

fuel - 4

asset - 4

paper census - 4

assessing - 4

college - 4

earnings gap - 4

information census - 4

fiscal - 4

customer - 4

executive - 4

corporate - 4

grocery - 4

sector productivity - 4

residing - 4

career - 4

postsecondary - 4

schooling - 4

adulthood - 4

death - 4

country - 4

recessionary - 4

agriculture - 4

health - 4

residential segregation - 4

suburbanization - 4

technology adoption - 4

good - 4

consumer - 4

purchase - 4

downstream - 4

sourcing - 4

disaster - 4

hurricane - 4

town - 4

effect wages - 4

census 2020 - 4

firms patents - 4

patents firms - 4

factor productivity - 4

depreciation - 4

area - 4

developed - 4

employment dynamics - 4

worker demographics - 4

longitudinal employer - 4

employment distribution - 4

moving - 4

shareholder - 4

bankruptcy - 4

income individuals - 4

immigrated - 4

privacy - 4

publicly - 4

industry wages - 4

endogenous - 4

census linked - 4

labor productivity - 4

available census - 4

survey income - 4

tenure - 4

electricity - 4

energy - 4

earnings age - 4

employment wages - 4

taxation - 4

matching - 4

recession exposure - 4

subsidized - 4

cost - 4

indicator - 4

policy - 4

immigrant entrepreneurs - 4

renewable - 4

union - 4

fertility - 4

earnings workers - 4

employment measures - 4

censuses surveys - 4

earnings mobility - 4

pension - 3

estimates intergenerational - 3

grandparent - 3

budget - 3

rate - 3

sample - 3

earns - 3

consolidated - 3

department - 3

identifier - 3

dispersion productivity - 3

warehouse - 3

productivity distribution - 3

productivity variation - 3

mother - 3

preschool - 3

cohort - 3

outcome - 3

midwest - 3

urbanized - 3

exporters multinationals - 3

export market - 3

affluent - 3

wage earnings - 3

firm patenting - 3

productivity dynamics - 3

wage effects - 3

patenting firms - 3

work census - 3

turnover - 3

collateral - 3

aging - 3

younger firms - 3

wages employment - 3

firms age - 3

firms young - 3

autoregressive - 3

growth employment - 3

shock - 3

information - 3

relocating - 3

firms import - 3

expense - 3

taxable - 3

restaurant - 3

apartment - 3

location - 3

outsourcing - 3

exogenous - 3

entry productivity - 3

employment increases - 3

income survey - 3

neighbor - 3

records census - 3

restriction - 3

race census - 3

larger firms - 3

interracial - 3

employment effects - 3

impact employment - 3

earnings growth - 3

income neighborhoods - 3

volatility - 3

ancestry - 3

firms grow - 3

poor - 3

industry variation - 3

network - 3

reallocation productivity - 3

geography - 3

oligopolistic - 3

utility - 3

enforcement - 3

locality - 3

wage data - 3

polluting - 3

econometrician - 3

earnings inequality - 3

pregnancy - 3

mandate - 3

individuals census - 3

business data - 3

employer household - 3

employment count - 3

measures employment - 3

workforce indicators - 3

employed census - 3

statistical agencies - 3

Viewing papers 131 through 140 of 306


  • Working Paper

    The Icing on the Cake: The Effects of Monetary Incentives on Income Data Quality in the SIPP

    January 2024

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-03

    Accurate measurement of key income variables plays a crucial role in economic research and policy decision-making. However, the presence of item nonresponse and measurement error in survey data can cause biased estimates. These biases can subsequently lead to sub-optimal policy decisions and inefficient allocation of resources. While there have been various studies documenting item nonresponse and measurement error in economic data, there have not been many studies investigating interventions that could reduce item nonresponse and measurement error. In our research, we investigate the impact of monetary incentives on reducing item nonresponse and measurement error for labor and investment income in the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). Our study utilizes a randomized incentive experiment in Waves 1 and 2 of the 2014 SIPP, which allows us to assess the effectiveness of incentives in reducing item nonresponse and measurement error. We find that households receiving incentives had item nonresponse rates that are 1.3 percentage points lower for earnings and 1.5 percentage points lower for Social Security income. Measurement error was 6.31 percentage points lower at the intensive margin for interest income, and 16.48 percentage points lower for dividend income compared to non-incentive recipient households. These findings provide valuable insights for data producers and users and highlight the importance of implementing strategies to improve data quality in economic research.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Incorporating Administrative Data in Survey Weights for the Basic Monthly Current Population Survey

    January 2024

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-02

    Response rates to the Current Population Survey (CPS) have declined over time, raising the potential for nonresponse bias in key population statistics. A potential solution is to leverage administrative data from government agencies and third-party data providers when constructing survey weights. In this paper, we take two approaches. First, we use administrative data to build a non-parametric nonresponse adjustment step while leaving the calibration to population estimates unchanged. Second, we use administratively linked data in the calibration process, matching income data from the Internal Return Service and state agencies, demographic data from the Social Security Administration and the decennial census, and industry data from the Census Bureau's Business Register to both responding and nonresponding households. We use the matched data in the household nonresponse adjustment of the CPS weighting algorithm, which changes the weights of respondents to account for differential nonresponse rates among subpopulations. After running the experimental weighting algorithm, we compare estimates of the unemployment rate and labor force participation rate between the experimental weights and the production weights. Before March 2020, estimates of the labor force participation rates using the experimental weights are 0.2 percentage points higher than the original estimates, with minimal effect on unemployment rate. After March 2020, the new labor force participation rates are similar, but the unemployment rate is about 0.2 percentage points higher in some months during the height of COVID-related interviewing restrictions. These results are suggestive that if there is any nonresponse bias present in the CPS, the magnitude is comparable to the typical margin of error of the unemployment rate estimate. Additionally, the results are overall similar across demographic groups and states, as well as using alternative weighting methodology. Finally, we discuss how our estimates compare to those from earlier papers that calculate estimates of bias in key CPS labor force statistics. This paper is for research purposes only. No changes to production are being implemented at this time.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Connected and Uncooperative: The Effects of Homogenous and Exclusive Social Networks on Survey Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias

    January 2024

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-24-01

    Social capital, the strength of people's friendship networks and community ties, has been hypothesized as an important determinant of survey participation. Investigating this hypothesis has been difficult given data constraints. In this paper, we provide insights by investigating how response rates and nonresponse bias in the American Community Survey are correlated with county-level social network data from Facebook. We find that areas of the United States where people have more exclusive and homogenous social networks have higher nonresponse bias and lower response rates. These results provide further evidence that the effects of social capital may not be simply a matter of whether people are socially isolated or not, but also what types of social connections people have and the sociodemographic heterogeneity of their social networks.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    A Simulated Reconstruction and Reidentification Attack on the 2010 U.S. Census: Full Technical Report

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-63R

    For the last half-century, it has been a common and accepted practice for statistical agencies, including the United States Census Bureau, to adopt different strategies to protect the confidentiality of aggregate tabular data products from those used to protect the individual records contained in publicly released microdata products. This strategy was premised on the assumption that the aggregation used to generate tabular data products made the resulting statistics inherently less disclosive than the microdata from which they were tabulated. Consistent with this common assumption, the 2010 Census of Population and Housing in the U.S. used different disclosure limitation rules for its tabular and microdata publications. This paper demonstrates that, in the context of disclosure limitation for the 2010 Census, the assumption that tabular data are inherently less disclosive than their underlying microdata is fundamentally flawed. The 2010 Census published more than 150 billion aggregate statistics in 180 table sets. Most of these tables were published at the most detailed geographic level'individual census blocks, which can have populations as small as one person. Using only 34 of the published table sets, we reconstructed microdata records including five variables (census block, sex, age, race, and ethnicity) from the confidential 2010 Census person records. Using only published data, an attacker using our methods can verify that all records in 70% of all census blocks (97 million people) are perfectly reconstructed. We further confirm, through reidentification studies, that an attacker can, within census blocks with perfect reconstruction accuracy, correctly infer the actual census response on race and ethnicity for 3.4 million vulnerable population uniques (persons with race and ethnicity different from the modal person on the census block) with 95% accuracy. Having shown the vulnerabilities inherent to the disclosure limitation methods used for the 2010 Census, we proceed to demonstrate that the more robust disclosure limitation framework used for the 2020 Census publications defends against attacks that are based on reconstruction. Finally, we show that available alternatives to the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance System would either fail to protect confidentiality, or would overly degrade the statistics' utility for the primary statutory use case: redrawing the boundaries of all of the nation's legislative and voting districts in compliance with the 1965 Voting Rights Act. You are reading the full technical report. For the summary paper see https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.4a1ebf70.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Outsourcing Dynamism

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-64

    This paper investigates the increasing importance of domestic outsourcing in U.S. manufacturing. Under domestic outsourcing, the agency is the employer of record for temporary workers, though they perform their tasks at the client business' premises. On a yearly basis, one in two manufacturing plants hires at least some of its workers through a temporary help agency. Furthermore, domestic outsourcing is becoming increasingly more important: the average share of revenue spent on such arrangements has gone up by 85 percent since 2006. We develop a methodology to transform reported expenses on temporary and leased workers into plant-level outsourced employment counts, using administrative data on the U.S. manufacturing sector. We find that domestic outsourcing is an important margin of adjustment that plants use to modify their workforce in response to productivity shocks. Plant-level outsourced employment adjusts more quickly and is twice as responsive as payroll employment. These micro implications have significant aggregate consequences. Without taking reallocations in outsourced employment into account, the measured pace at which jobs reallocate across workplaces is underestimated. On average, we omit the equivalent of 15 percent of payroll employment reallocations in each year. However, outsourced employment churns at a much higher rate compared to its payroll counterpart. Therefore, the omission of outsourced reallocations can rationalize 37 percent of the secular decline in the aggregate job reallocation rate. Lastly, the extent of mismeasurement varies with the business cycle; falling in downturns and increasing in upturns implying that the speed of economic recovery is underestimated.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    The 2010 Census Confidentiality Protections Failed, Here's How and Why

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-63

    Using only 34 published tables, we reconstruct five variables (census block, sex, age, race, and ethnicity) in the confidential 2010 Census person records. Using the 38-bin age variable tabulated at the census block level, at most 20.1% of reconstructed records can differ from their confidential source on even a single value for these five variables. Using only published data, an attacker can verify that all records in 70% of all census blocks (97 million people) are perfectly reconstructed. The tabular publications in Summary File 1 thus have prohibited disclosure risk similar to the unreleased confidential microdata. Reidentification studies confirm that an attacker can, within blocks with perfect reconstruction accuracy, correctly infer the actual census response on race and ethnicity for 3.4 million vulnerable population uniques (persons with nonmodal characteristics) with 95% accuracy, the same precision as the confidential data achieve and far greater than statistical baselines. The flaw in the 2010 Census framework was the assumption that aggregation prevented accurate microdata reconstruction, justifying weaker disclosure limitation methods than were applied to 2010 Census public microdata. The framework used for 2020 Census publications defends against attacks that are based on reconstruction, as we also demonstrate here. Finally, we show that alternatives to the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance System with similar accuracy (enhanced swapping) also fail to protect confidentiality, and those that partially defend against reconstruction attacks (incomplete suppression implementations) destroy the primary statutory use case: data for redistricting all legislatures in the country in compliance with the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Where to Build Affordable Housing? Evaluating the Tradeoffs of Location

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-62R

    How does the location of affordable housing affect tenant welfare, the distribution of assistance, and broader societal objectives such as racial integration? Using administrative data on tenants of units funded by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), we first show that characteristics such as race and proxies for need vary widely across neighborhoods. Despite fixed eligibility requirements, LIHTC developments in more opportunity-rich neighborhoods house tenants who are higher income, more educated, and far less likely to be Black. To quantify the welfare implications, we build a residential choice model in which households choose from both market-rate and affordable housing options, where the latter must be rationed. While building affordable housing in higher-opportunity neighborhoods costs more, it also increases household welfare and reduces city-wide segregation. The gains in household welfare, however, accrue to more moderate-need, non-Black/Hispanic households at the expense of other households. This change in the distribution of assistance is primarily due to a 'crowding out' effect: households that only apply for assistance in higher-opportunity neighborhoods crowd out those willing to apply regardless of location. Finally, other policy levers'such as lowering the income limits used for means-testing'have only limited effects relative to the choice of location.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Is the Gender Pay Gap Largest at the Top?

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-61

    No: it is at least as large at bottom percentiles of the earnings distribution. Conditional quantile regressions reveal that while the gap at top percentiles is largest among the most-educated, the gap at bottom percentiles is largest among the least-educated. Gender differences in labor supply create more pay inequality among the least-educated than they do among the most-educated. The pay gap has declined throughout the distribution since 2006, but it declined more for the most-educated women. Current economics-of-gender research focuses heavily on the top end; equal emphasis should be placed on mechanisms driving gender inequality for noncollege-educated workers.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Productivity Dispersion and Structural Change in Retail Trade

    December 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-60R

    The retail sector has changed from a sector full of small firms to one dominated by large, national firms. We study how this transformation has impacted productivity levels, growth, and dispersion between 1987 and 2017. We describe this transformation using three overlapping phases: expansion (1980s and 1990s), consolidation (2000s), and stagnation (2010s). We document five findings that help us understand these phases. First, productivity growth was high during the consolidation phase but has fallen more recently. Second, entering establishments drove productivity growth during the expansion phase, but continuing establishments have increased in importance more recently. Third, national chains have more productive establishments than single-unit firms on average, but some single-unit establishments are highly productive. Fourth, productivity dispersion is significant and increasing over time. Finally, more productive firms pay higher wages and grow more quickly. Together, these results suggest that the increasing importance of large national retail firms has been an important driver of productivity and wage growth in the retail sector.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Local and National Concentration Trends in Jobs and Sales: The Role of Structural Transformation

    November 2023

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-23-59

    National U.S. industrial concentration rose between 1992-2017. Simultaneously, the Herfindhahl Index of local (six-digit-NAICS by county) employment concentration fell. This divergence between national and local employment concentration is due to structural transformation. Both sales and employment concentration rose within industry-by-county cells. But activity shifted from concentrated Manufacturing towards relatively un-concentrated Services. A stronger between-sector shift in employment relative to sales explains the fall in local employment concentration. Had sectoral employment shares remained at their 1992 levels, average local employment concentration would have risen by 9% by 2017 rather than falling by 7%.
    View Full Paper PDF