PROPOSED IMMIGRATION POLICY REFORM & FARM LABOR MARKET OUTCOMES



workers may potentially gain from future legalization, with wage increases by as much as 18%.
In this respect, the cost implications for farm employers are clear in that labor costs would
increase if amnesty were to be granted to workers who are currently unauthorized. Whether this
may encourage employers to shift to more capital intensive methods of production over time
would depend on the magnitude of the cost increase and the degree of stringency and
effectiveness of future legislation in controlling illegal immigration and employment.

References

Basu A, Heckman J, Navarro-Lozano S, Urzua S. 2007. “Use of Instrumental Variables in
The Presence of Heterogeneity and Self-Selection: An Application to Treatments of
Breast Cancer Patients,”
Health Economics 16: 1133-1157.

Bjorklund, A. and R. Moffitt. 1987. “The Estimation of Wage Gains and Welfare Gains in Self
Selection Models.”
The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(1): 42-49

Blundell, R. and M. Costa Dias. 2002. “Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical
Microeconomics.”
Portuguese Economic Journal 1: 91-115.

Caliendo, M. 2006. Microeconometric Evaluation of Labor Market Policies. Berlin: Springer.

Carroll, D., R. Samardick, S. Bernard, S. Gabbard, T. Hernandez. 2005. Findings from

The National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001 - 2002: A Demographic and
Employment Profile of United States Farm Workers. U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy, Research Report No. 9. Available
at:
http://www.doleta.gov/agworker/report9/naws_rpt9.pdf.

Heckman, J and X. Li. 2004. “Selection Bias, Comparative Advantage and Heterogeneous

Returns to Education: Evidence from China in 2000.” Pacific Economic Review 9(3):
155-171.

Heckman, J. and E. Vytlacil. 2005. “Structural Equations, Treatment Effects and
Econometric Policy Evaluation.”
Econometrica 73(3): 669-738.

Heckman, J., J. Tobias and E. Vytlacil. 2001. “Four Parameters of Interest in the Evaluation of

Social Programs.” Southern Economic Journal 68: 210-223.

Heckman, J., J. Tobias, and E. Vytlacil. 2003. “Simple Estimators for Treatment Parameters in
A Latent Variable Framework.”
Review of Economics and Statistics 85:748-755.

Heckman, J, S. Urzua and E. Vytlacil. 2006a. “Understanding Instrumental Variables in Models
with Essential Heterogeneity.”
The Review of Economics and Statistics. 88(3): 389-432.

19



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Climate change, mitigation and adaptation: the case of the Murray–Darling Basin in Australia
5. Declining Discount Rates: Evidence from the UK
6. The name is absent
7. Altruism with Social Roots: An Emerging Literature
8. Unemployment in an Interdependent World
9. Gianluigi Zenti, President, Academia Barilla SpA - The Changing Consumer: Demanding but Predictable
10. Momentum in Australian Stock Returns: An Update
11. The name is absent
12. The Values and Character Dispositions of 14-16 Year Olds in the Hodge Hill Constituency
13. Migrant Business Networks and FDI
14. The name is absent
15. Housing Market in Malaga: An Application of the Hedonic Methodology
16. Models of Cognition: Neurological possibility does not indicate neurological plausibility.
17. Testing Gribat´s Law Across Regions. Evidence from Spain.
18. The name is absent
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent