!

!

!

Compulsory*Military*Service*and*Sibling*Externalities*on*

the*High*School*Dropout*Rate*

Evidence(from(Switzerland(!

Husam!El)Tarifi!

!

Bachelor(of(Economics!in!Economics!and!Finance!

!Declaration*

*

I!declare!that!this!thesis!has!not!been!submitted!anywhere!for!award,!is!my!own!

work!and,!to!the!best!of!my!knowledge,!holds!no!content!that!has!been!published!

by!or!is!the!intellectual!right!of!another,!except!where!due!acknowledgement!is!

made.!!

!

*

*

*

*

Date:! 22/10/2012! Signature:! _______________________!

!

Acknowledgments*!Of(my(family(

!

I!would!like!to!thank!my!father!for!advising!me!to!study!economics,!choosing!this!

major!been!one!of!the!best!decisions!I’ve!made.!Thanks!to!my!mother!for!being!the!

most!amazing!person!I!know,!and!special!thanks!to!my!brother!for!the!sibling!

support!which!I!find!to!be!so!important!in!this!thesis.!

!

Of(the(Honours(Cohort(

!

Thanks!to!Ashna!“Ash”!Taneja!and!Axelle!“Axe”!Marjolin!for!putting!up!with!the!

nicknames.!!

!

Thanks!to!David!and!Marcus!for!being!two!of!the!most!brilliant!people!I!know!and!

thanks!to!Will,!Carlos!and!Cassie!for!being!just!plain!awesome.!

!

Thanks!to!Rakan!and!Suchita!for!the!constant!stream!of!econo)memes.!Thanks!to!

Adam!and!Peter!for!being!constantly!hilarious.!

!

Thanks!to!Richie!and!Jen!for!being!so!inimitable,!Jason!for!being!the!man,!and!James!

for!being!the!nicest!guy!I!know.!

!

Of(the(Faculty(

!

Thanks!to!Denise,!your!econometrics!class!was!one!of!the!best!I’ve!ever!taken;!it!

ultimately!led!me!to!choose!applied!work!for!my!thesis.!!

!

Special!thanks!goes!to!Stanley!for!putting!up!with!my!shenanigans!and!to!Valentyn!

for!giving!me!that!little!bit!of!extra!time!to!put!all!of!this!together.!!

!

Lastly,!I!am!forever!grateful!to!my!supervisor,!Marian,!for!all!the!assistance!with!this!

thesis,!you!have!been!invaluable.! !

!

!

*

*

*

*

*

*

Abstract*

!!

This!paper!examines!the!effect!of!an!individual!being!conscripted!on!their!siblings’!

propensity!to!dropout!from!high!school.!!

!

Using!a!Swiss!panel!dataset,!this!thesis!merges!the!two!literatures!of!‘sibling!

externalities’!and!‘compulsory!military!service!effects’!to!build!on!both.!It!establishes!

a!clearer!causality!relationship!in!both!fields!by!observing!sibling!level!effects!as!

opposed!to!broader!peer!effects.!

!

This!paper!finds!negative!effects!on!the!high!school!completion!rates!of!the!female!

siblings!of!conscripts,!while!male!siblings!are!unaffected!overall.!Examining!this!in!

detail!shows!heterogeneous!effects;!females!in!less!wealthy!households!experience!

much!stronger!and!more!damaging!effects!while!their!wealthier!counterparts!

experience!no!discernable!effect.!These!effects!are!found!to!be!largely!due!to!

reductions!in!peer!support,!which!result!from!older!brothers!leaving!the!household!

when!conscripted.!

* *

Table*of*Contents*

!

Introduction* 1*

Literature*Review* 5*

Compulsory(Military(Service(and(Labour(Outcomes( 5(

Compulsory(Military(Service(and(Education(Externalities( 7(

Siblings(and(Education(Externalities( 8(

Institutional*Setting* 11*

Education( 11(

Conscription( 11(

Causal(Mechanisms( 12(

Data* 14*

SHP(Dataset( 14(

Sample(Construction( 14(

SLFS(dataset( 15(

Summary(Statistics( 16(

Empirical*Strategy* 18*

Causality( 18(

Fixed(Effects(Regressions( 18(

2S2SLS!Generation!Procedure( 19(

The(Instrument( 21(

Results* 22*

Robustness*Checks* 32*

Falsification( 32(

Individual(V.S.(Household(Fixed(Effects( 33(

Panel(Attrition( 35(

Sibling(Support(Robustness( 37(

Conclusion* 39*

Summary(of(Results( 39(

Implications( 39(

Limitations(and(Future(Research( 40(

Appendix* 42*

!

List*of*Tables*

! !

Table!1:!Summary!of!the!Literature! 6!

Table!2:!SHP!Summary!Statistics! 17!

Table!3:!Females!aged!20!and!above! 23!

Table!4:!Males!aged!20!and!above! 25!

Table!5:!Females!aged!15!to!19! 27!

Table!6:!Family!incomes!for!females!aged!20!and!above! 28!

Table!7:!Family!incomes!for!males!aged!20!and!above! 29!

Table!8:!Emotional!support!for!females!aged!18!and!above!in!low/middle)income!

families! 30!

Table!9:!Females!aged!20!and!above!in!different!households! 33!

Table!10:!Individual!V.S.!household!level!fixed!effects! 34!

Table!11:!Females!aged!20!and!above,!1999!households! 36!

Table!12:!Individuals!aged!18!and!above,!by!primary!language! 38!

!

! 1!

Introduction!

!

Every! year,! over!20,000!young!men! called!up! for!mandatory!military! service! in!

Switzerland.! ! It! has!been!well! established! that! compulsory!military! service! (CMS)!

tends! to! have! negative! effects! on! those! conscripted! in! terms! of! their! labour! and!

educational! outcomes.! Little! is! known! however! about! the! externalities! associated!

with!CMS.!

!

Today,! compulsory! military! service! is! present! in! many! OECD! countries;! these!

include! Denmark,! Austria,! Finland,! Greece,! Israel,! South! Korea,! Singapore,! Turkey!

and!Switzerland.!!

!

Many! countries! have! recently! begun! examining! suspending! CMS! laws,! which! are!

often! legacies! of! the! first! and! second! World! Wars.! Germany! and! Sweden,! for!

example,! have! ended! CMS! in! 2011! and! 2010,! respectively.! In! Switzerland,! a!

referendum! is! likely! to! occur! in! the! near! future! to! decide!whether! to!maintain! or!

repeal!CMS!laws.!

!

In!this!thesis,!I!build!on!a!very!new!externalities!literature!by!examining!the!effects!

associated!with!male!CMS!on!the!siblings!of!conscripts.!

!

There!are!many!studies!examining!the!effects!of!CMS!on!the!conscripts!themselves!

(see! Table! 1! and! Appendix! 1A).! These! have! been! conducted! on! a! vast! range! of!

countries,! and! while! some! effects! are! country! specific,! most! papers! find! negative!

effects!on!education!and!future!earnings.!

!

Some!of!these!papers!employ!women!as!a!control!group!with!the!assumption!that,!if!

they!are!exempt! from!service! (true!everywhere! in! the!OECD!with! the!exception!of!

Israel),! they! cannot! be! affected!by! it.!However,! if! there! exist! any! externalities,! the!

findings!in!these!papers!may!be!misestimated.!

!

As!far!as!I!know!there!is!only!one!other!study!examining!the!externalities!associated!

with! CMS! as! a! central! question;! Cipollone! and! Rosolia! (2007)! find! negative! peers!

effects!at!the!town!level!as!a!result!of!CMS!in!Italy.!A!number!of!studies!(Buonanno!

! 2!

2007;!Maurin!and!Xenogiani!2007;!Grenet,!Hart!et!al.!2011)!only!examine!the!effects!

of!peer!service!as!a!robustness!check1,!they!all!find!no!educational!or!earning!based!

externalities!from!the!repeal!CMS!policies!in!the!U.K.!and!in!France.!!

!

It! is! plausible! that! country! level! differences! (such! as! CMS! enforcement! or! more!

general!cultural!factors)!account!for!most!of!these!differences!in!results.!2!I!employ!a!

more!micro! level!approach!by!observing!household! level!effects! (specifically! those!

relating!to!siblings).! !This!allows!the!investigation!of!clearer!causality!relationships!

as!opposed!to!broad!peer!effects.!Many!of!these!relationships!are!robust!to!countryW!

level! heterogeneity! and! therefore! hint! at! likely! outcomes! in! countries! outside! of!

Switzerland.!!!

!

In!this!thesis,!I!also!attempt!to!study!sibling!composition!and!sibling!presence!effects!

by!estimating!the!effect!of!a!male!sibling!leaving!home.!I!do!this!by!employing!CMS!

as!an!exogenous!shock!to!male!sibling!presence.!

!

These! relationships! are! important! to! examine,! as! any! peer! effects/externalities!

present!involve!much!of!society,!possibly!inform!social!policy,!and,!as!suggested!by!

Butcher!and!Case!(1994),! !may!provide!a!practical! instrument!for!use! in!education!

related!analyses.!

!

The!siblings’!externalities! literature! finds!ambiguous!results,! especially! in! the!area!

concerning! sibling!gender! composition.!Butcher!and!Case! (1994)! find! that! females!

with!all!male!siblings!attain!higher!levels!of!education!than!their!counterparts!with!a!

least!one! sister.!However,!Hauser!and!Kuo! (1998)!and!Kaestner! (1997),! in! similar!

studies,! find! no! effect! of! sibling! gender! composition! on! education.! I! examine! the!

presence! of! shortWterm! composition/presence! effects! through! CMS! and! argue! that!

the!causal!mechanisms!are!likely!to!be,!at!least!partially,!generalizable!to!the!longer!

term/overall!cases!examined!in!this!literature.!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!That!is,!their!focus!lies!on!estimating!the!effect!of!CMS!on!the!conscripts!themselves.!They!all!run!the!same!analysis!with!women!with!the!reasoning!that,!if!women!are!exempt!from!service!and!no!effect!is!found,!the!assumptions!and!methodologies!are!sound.!Clearly,!externalities/peer!effects!are!assumed!not!to!exist.!2!The!methodologies!employed!by!the!two!sets!of!papers!are!also!vastly!different.!Cipollone!&!Rosolia!(2007)!employ!a!very!convincing!instrumental!variable!approach,!while!the!papers!that!only!examine!women!as!a!robustness!check!all!employ!regression!discontinuity!design!techniques!to!assess!the!abolishment!of!CMS!laws.!

! 3!

There! are! a! number! of! causal! channels! through!which! the! peer! effects! of! CMS! on!

siblings!can!occur.!These!factors!often!act!in!opposite!directions;!as!such!the!overall!

effect!seems!ambiguous.! !On!the!one!hand,!males!completing!their!service!not!only!

leave!home!(resulting!in!a!relaxing!of!household!financial!constraints!as!spending!on!

them! is! reduced)! but! also! receive! an! income! from! the! Swiss! government! for! the!

length! of! their! service! (meaning! they! can! actually! contribute! to! the! household’s’!

income).!For!poorer! families,! it! is! therefore!possible! that! this! resultant! relaxing!of!

familial!financial!constraints!can!have!a!positive!effect!on!sibling!education!as!more!

money! is! spent! on! tutoring! or! other! forms! of! educational! support.! On! the! other!

hand,! when! siblings! are! away! for! relatively! long! periods! of! time,! there! results! a!

decrease!in!sibling!support!factors!such!as!homework!help1!and!emotional!support.!

This! support! channel! is! therefore! likely! to! act! in! the! opposite! direction! to! the!

financial!channel.!

!

In!this!thesis,! I!employ!individualWlevel! fixed!effects!regressions!with!a!twoWsample!

twoWstage! least!squares! instrumental!variable!approach! to!control! for!a!number!of!

endogeneity! and! selection! factors.! I! find! that,! overall;! there! are! strong! negative!

educational! externalities! for! females! associated! with! compulsory!military! service.!

Specifically,!I!find!that!on!average,!females!are!4%!more!likely!to!drop!out!when!an!

older!male!sibling!is!conscripted.!

!

Upon!dissecting!this!effect,!I!find!that!the!femaleWbased!effects!are!not!discernable!in!

wealthy!households2!but!are!very!clear!(and!stronger!than!the!overall!case)! in! less!

wealthy! families.! I! also! find! that! much! of! this! low/middle! class! effect! can! be!

explained! by! decreases! in! sibling! support! resulting! from! a! sibling! temporarily!

leaving! the! household! due! to! CMS.! This! effect! seems! to! outweigh! any! financial!

effects,!which!are!expected!to!act!in!the!opposite!direction!(i.e.,!result!in!a!reduction!

in!the!propensity!to!dropout).!

!

Unlike! females,! the! younger! male! siblings! of! conscripts! tend! to! experience! no!

discernable! overall! effect,! however,! when! restricting! the! analysis! to! less! wealthy!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!To!ensure!the!causal!direction!is!appropriate,!that!is,!a!sibling!being!conscripted!affects!an!individual’s!dropout!propensity!and!not!the!other!way!around,!I!only!examine!individuals!with!older!male!siblings.!This!means!the!homework!assistance!channel!is!much!more!promising.!2!Wealthy!households!are!defined!as!households!earning!more!than!150,000!SFr!per!year,!less!wealthy!households!are!those!that!earn!less.!

! 4!

households,! I! find!that! they!experience!a!decrease! in! their!dropout!propensity!as!a!

result!of!a!sibling!being!conscripted.!There!does!not!seem!to!be!any!evidence!of!the!

sibling!support!effect!for!males.!The!effect!for!lower/middleWclass!males!is!likely!the!

result!of!a!decrease!in!household!financial!constraints;!however,!this!is!not!explicitly!

tested!for.!

!

I!conduct!a!number!of!alternative!tests!to!ensure!the!robustness!of!the!results;!these!

include! a! falsification! exercise,! a! test! for! attritionWbased! effects,! and! a! robustness!

check!for!the!sibling!support! finding.!All!of!tests!support!the!findings!of!this!study.

! 5!

Literature-Review!

-

Compulsory.Military.Service.and.Labour.Outcomes.

-

A! large! number! of! studies! have! examined! the! direct! effects! of! CMS! on! labour!

outcomes;!these!largely!focus!on!wage!and!educational!attainment!differences.!!

!

As!in!the!brief!overview!provided!in!Table!1,!the!effects!of!CMS!vary!with!countryW

level! heterogeneity.! In!most! examined! countries,! conscripted! individuals! generally!

exhibit! lower! levels!of!education;! this! is!especially! true! for!countries!that!maintain!

CMS! deferment! options! for! those! enrolled! in! higher! education.! The! tendency! for!

draft!avoidance!behaviours! to!affect!schooling!achievement! is!most!notably!shown!

by!Angrist!and!Krueger!(1992),!where!the!authors!use!the!VietnamWera!draft!lottery!

as!an!instrument!to!measure!the!returns!to!schooling.!

!

Of!the!15!papers!examining!the!effects!of!CMS!on!employment!or!education!in!Table!

1,! only! 3! find! positive! outcomes! for! conscripts.! These! results! are! largely! due! to!

country!specific!properties!such!as!the!GI!Bill!for!the!U.S.A.!

!

The!majority!of!this!literature!is!very!recent!and!EuropeWcentric.!This!is!largely!due!

to!the!recent!trend!across!European!countries!to!end!CMS.!

!

A! few!of! the! studies! surveyed!attempt! to!measure! the! labour!outcomes!of!CMS!by!

employing!women!as!the!control!group.!These!include!Card!and!Lemieux!(2001),!Di!

Pietro!(2009)!and!Paloyo!(2010).!It!is!important!to!note!that!if!peer!externalities!are!

present,!these!results!may!be!misestimated.1!

!

Two!papers,!Card!and!Cardoso!(2011)!and!Di!Pietro!(2009)!find!heterogeneity!in!the!

effects!of!CMS.!Card!and!Cardoso!(2011)!find!those!with!lower!levels!of!education!in!

Portugal!benefit! from!CMS,!while! those!with!higher! levels!of! education!experience!

no!discernable!effect.!Di!Pietro!(2009)!in!an!Italian!analysis,!however,!finds!that!less!

advantaged! individuals! obtain! lower! levels! of! education! as! a! result! of! CMS! while!

advantaged!ones!obtain!higher!levels.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!Whether!these!results!are!under!or!over!estimated!depends!on!the!direction!of!the!link!between!military!service!and!peer!outcomes.!A!positive!link!implies!systematic!underestimation.!

! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!This!p

apers!e

mploys!a!cro

ss0country!approach!

Table&1:&Summary&of&the&literature&

Papers&Examining&the&D

irect&Effects&of&Compulsory&M

ilitary&Service&(CMS)&on&Earnings&

Paper!

Country!

Deferment!due!

to!Higher!

Education!

Peacetim

e!

Effect!o

f!CMS!

Albrecht,!E

din!et!al.!(1

999)!

Sweden!

No!

Yes!

Conscrip

ts!earned!higher!w

ages!th

an!those!that!avoided!CMS!

Angrist!a

nd!Chen!(2011)!

U.S.A.!

Yes!

No!

Negligible!wage!diffe

rences!over!th

e!long!term!

Angrist!a

nd!Krueger!(1

992)!

U.S.A.!

Yes!

No!

Higher!education!deferments!re

sulted!in!higher!w

ages!fo

r!those!that!avoided!CMS!

Buonanno!(2007)!

U.K.!

Yes!

Yes!

Conscrip

ts!earned!less!th

an!exempt!co

horts!

Card!and!Cardoso!(2011)!

Portu

gal!

Yes!

Yes!

Improved!prospects!fo

r!conscrip

ts!with!only!prim

ary!education,!no!effect!fo

r!

conscrip

ts!with!higher!le

vels!o

f!education!

Galiani,!R

ossi!e

t!al.!(2

011)!

Argentina!

Yes!

Yes/No!

Conscrip

ts!showed!lower!la

bour!fo

rce!particip

ation!and!marginally!lower!w

age!

rates!in

!both!peacetim

e!and!wartim

e!

Grenet,!H

art!e

t!al.!(2

011)!!

U.K.!

Yes!

Yes!

No!effect!

Imbens!and!van!der!Klaauw!

(1995)!

Netherlands!

Yes!

Yes!

Conscrip

ts!earned!less!th

an!those!that!avoided!CMS!

Paloyo!(2010)!

Germany!

No!

Yes!

No!effect!

Papers&Examining&the&D

irect&Effects&of&Compulsory&M

ilitary&Service&(CMS)&on&Educational&Attainm

ent&

Paper!

Country!

Deferment!due!

to!Higher!

Education!

Peacetim

e!

Effect!o

f!CMS!

Angrist!a

nd!Chen!(2011)!

U.S.A.!

Yes!

No!

Higher!education!levels!fo

r!veterans!due!to!GI!Bill!

Bauer,!B

ender!et!al.!(2

012)!

West!G

ermany!

No!

No!

No!effect!

Buonanno!(2007)!

U.K.!

Yes!

Yes!

Higher!education!deferments!re

sulted!in!slig

htly!higher!education!levels!fo

r!those!

that!avoided!CMS!!

Card!and!Lemieux!(2001)!

U.S.A.!

Yes!

No!

Higher!education!deferments!re

sulted!in!higher!education!levels!fo

r!those!that!

avoided!CMS!

Cipollone!and!Rosolia!(2007)!

Italy!

Yes!

Yes!

Conscrip

ts!were!less!e

ducated!than!exempt!co

horts!

Di!Pietro!(2009)!

Italy!

Yes!

Yes!

CMS!abolitio

n!is!a

ssociated!with!higher!educational!outco

mes!fo

r!advantaged!

individuals!b

ut!lo

wer!outco

mes!fo

r!less!a

dvantaged!individuals!

Grenet,!H

art!e

t!al.!(2

011)!

U.K.!

Yes!

Yes!

Draft!a

voidance!behaviours!re

sulted!in!a!sm

all!b

ut!positiv

e!effect!o

n!education!

levels!

Keller,!P

outvaara!et!al.!(2

010)!

N/A1!

0!Yes!

Countrie

s!with!CMS!tended!to!have!lower!le

vels!o

f!higher!education!demand!

Maurin!and!Xenogiani!(2

007)!

France!

Yes!

Yes!

Draft!a

voidance!behaviours!re

sulted!in!a!positiv

e!effect!o

n!education!levels!

! 7!

The! findings! of! Card! and! Cardoso! (2011)! are! much! more! believable;! the! panel!

dataset! and! the! structural! methodology! they! employ! seem! to! control! for!

endogeneity! factors! much! more! effectively! than! the! non?panel! difference! in!

difference!approach!employed!by!Di!Pietro!(2009).!It!is!likely!that!not!controlling!for!

higher!education!deferment!is!confounding!Di!Pietro’s!results.!A!similar!bias!effect!is!

also!seen! in!Buonanno!(2007)!and! is!discussed! in! the!Compulsory!Military!Service!

and!Education!Externalities!subsection!below.!

!

I! build! on! this! heterogeneous! effect! analysis! in! this! thesis! by! examining! the!

externalities!in!a!wealth!context.!!

!

In!a!macro?level!cross?country!analysis,!Keller,!Poutvaara!et!al.!(2010)!find!that!CMS!

in! OECD! countries! is! associated! with! a! negative! effect! on! the! demand! for! higher!

education.!This!effect!is!shown!to!increase!in!intensity!and!significance!as!duration!

and!intensity!of!enforcement!increases.!!!

!

Compulsory*Military*Service*and*Education*Externalities!

!

The!direct!effects!literature’s!main!focus!is!on!males!eligible!to!be!conscripted.!There!

are!few!papers!examining!the!educational!externalities!associated!with!CMS.!As!far!

as!I!know,!there!is!only!one!published!paper!that!attempts!to!measure!peer!effects!as!

a!central!question;!Cipollone!and!Rosolia!(2007).!

!

Cipollone! and!Rosolia! (2007)! are! the! first! to! link! CMS! to! educational! peer! effects.!

The!authors!exploit!a!partial!CMS!exemption!in!the!1980s,!caused!by!an!earthquake!

in! Southern! Italy! as! a! very! convincing! instrument! to! isolate! the! effect! of! CMS! on!

schooling! attainment.! The! authors! find! that! the! exemption! raised! the! high?school!

graduation! rates!of! boys!by!over!2%.!When!examining! the!high?school! graduation!

rates!of!girls,!they!find!a!similar!positive!effect!(an!increase!of!1%)!despite!them!not!

being!required!(or!able)!to!serve!in!the!military.!

!

Buonanno!(2007)!and!Grenet,!Hart!et!al.!(2011)!both!examine!the!effects!of!ending!

CMS!in!the!United!Kingdom.!Buonanno!(2007)!finds!that!males!who!served!for!two!

years! in! the! National! Service! earned,! on! average,! 5%! less! than! their! exempt!

! 8!

counterparts.!He!also!finds!that!exempt!cohorts!accumulated,!on!average,!0.25!years!

of! additional! education.! Grenet,! Hart! et! al.! (2011)! builds! on! Buonanno! (2007)! to!

observe! no! long?term!wage! effects! that,!when! controlling! for! conscript! deferment!

(due!to!apprenticeships!or!university).!

!

Both!of! these!papers!test!the!robustness!of! their!results!by!estimating!the!effect!of!

repealing! CMS! laws! on! women! with! the! hypothesis! that! no! effects! should! be!

observed!due! to!women!being!exempt! from!service.!They! find!no!effect!on! female!

education!or!wages.!In!a!similar!analysis,!Maurin!and!Xenogiani!(2007)!also!find!no!

effect.!

!

The! differences! in! these! sets! of! results! may! be! due! to! differences! in! CMS! policy!

and/or!broad!country?level!differences!such!as!stronger!of!CMS!enforcement!in!Italy!

(Cipollone!and!Rosolia!2007).!

!

In! this! paper! I! employ! a! focus! on! sibling! peer! effects! to! build! on! the! literature!

examining!the!effects!of!CMS!on!peer!educational!outcomes.!I!focus!on!sibling!effects!

to!establish!a!clearer!causality!relationship!and!observe!a!local!effect!(as!opposed!to!

more!broad!peer!effects)!that!can!be!more!robust!to!country!level!heterogeneity.!

!

Siblings*and*Education*Externalities*

!

A! large! number! of! studies! examine! the! effects! of! externalities! on! educational!

outcomes.!The!siblings!externalities!sub?field! is! itself!vast!and!ranges! from!studies!

that!examine!the!balance!between!genetic!and!environmental!factors!in!determining!

educational!outcomes!(Behrman!and!Taubman!1989;!Plug!and!Vijverberg!2003)1!to!

studies! that! examine! the! relative! impact! of! siblings! against! that! of! friends! and!

classmates!(Duncan,!Boisjoly!et!al.!2001)2.!

!

The!subset!examining!gender!and!composition!based!factors!is!most!relevant!to!this!

paper.!!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!These!typically!find!an!approximately!even!split!between!genetic!factors!and!environmental!ones.!2!Sibling!and!family!based!factors!are!more!correlated!with!achievement!and!delinquency!measures!than!neighbour,!friend,!or!classmate!factors.!

! 9!

Black,!Devereux!et!al.! (2005)!examine! the!effects!of! family!size!and!birth!order!on!

children’s! educational! outcomes.! The! authors! find! negative! family! size! effects! on!

educational!outcomes.!However,!when!controlling!for!birth!order,!family!size!effects!

are! found! to! be! insignificant.! The! authors! also! find! that! a! higher! birth! order! is!

associated!with!lower!levels!or!education!and!earnings.!

!

Butcher!and!Case!(1994)!examine!the!effects!of!sibling!quantity!and!sex!composition!

on! educational! attainment! with! U.S.A.! data.! They! find! that,! when! controlling! for!

family! size,!men!were!unaffected!by! the! sex! composition!of! their! siblings.!Women!

raised! with! all! male! siblings,! however,! received! more! education! on! average! than!

women!with!at! least!one!sister.!Butcher!and!Case!(1994)!also!find!that!educational!

outcomes!tend!to!be!lower!for!individuals!with!larger!numbers!of!siblings.!

!

Kaestner! (1996)!and!Hauser!and!Kuo! (1998)!contest! the! results! found!by!Butcher!

and! Case! (1994).! Both! papers! find! no! evidence! of! general! correlations! between!

sibling!gender!and!educational!attainment.!Kaestner!(1997),!however,!does!find!that!

black!adults!who!have!sisters!tend!to!have!greater!levels!of!education.!!

!

A!number!of!papers!examine!these!effects!for!developing!countries.!Qureshi!(2012)!

finds! that! investing! in! older! sisters’! education! is! associated! with! positive!

externalities! for! the! education! of! younger!male! siblings.! The! author! suggests! that!

this!is!likely!due!to!the!childcare!responsibilities!associated!with!older!sisters.!!Garg!

and! Morduch! (1998)! find! that,! due! to! a! preference! for! males! and! constrained!

resources,!children!with!all! female!siblings!have!health! indicators!that!are!25?40%!

higher!than!for!children!with!all!male!siblings.!Morduch!(2000)!finds!variable!sibling!

composition! effects! by! country.1!Bommier! and! Lambert! (2004)! find! sibling! rivalry!

for!human!capital!investments!is!not!exclusively!the!result!of!constrained!resources.!

!

Fletcher,!Seltzer!et!al.!(2012)!examine!the!effect!of!sibling!death.!They!find!negative!

effects!on!educational!attainment,!and!show!that!sisters!are!more!affected!than!their!

brothers.!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!This!suggests!that!the!discrepancy!between!Butcher!and!case!(1994)!and!Kaestner!(1996)!and!Hauser!and!Kuo!(1998)!could!be,!at!least!partially,!due!to!country!level!effects.!

! 10!

Many!of!these!findings!suggest!sibling!support!factors!are!at!play,!but!none!attempt!

explicitly! measure! these! effects.! ! I! hypothesise! that! if! these! are! found! to! be!

significant! in! Switzerland,! a! country! known! for! relatively! distant! familial!

relationships,!then!this!effect!should!be!highly!generalizable!to!other!countries.!

!

In!this!paper,!I!expand!on!this!literature!(simultaneously!with!the!CMS!literature)!by!

focusing! on! the! outcomes! relating! to!male! siblings!moving! out! from! home! due! to!

CMS.! I! argue! that,!when! controlling! for! a!number!of! variables! and! individual?level!

fixed!effects,!the!act!moving!out!is!an!exogenous!event,!and!as!such!enables!a!clearer!

analysis! of! these! sibling! effects! –! at! least! in! the! short?term! period! over! which! a!

sibling!is!conscripted.!

!

! !

! 11!

Institutional!Setting*

!

Education!

!

The!Swiss!dropout!rate!is!approximately!12%!and!is!one!of!the!lowest!in!the!world.!

!

In!Switzerland,!the!government!provides!primary!education!for!free,!and!almost!all!

children!attend!these!public!schools.!After!primary!school,!students!enter!secondary!

education!where!they!are!more!likely!to!pay!for!tuition.!

!

The!minimum!age! at!which! an! individual! can!dropout! from!school! is! 15!years! (or!

after!9!years!of!schooling).!This!means!that! individuals!must!spend!some!time!in!a!

secondary!school!before!having!the!option!of!dropping!out.!

!

Conscription!

!

At!age!20,!Swiss!males!are!required!by!law!to!undertake!CMS.!Approximately!sixty!

percent!serve! in! the!military!and!10%!opt! for!civil! service.!Conscripts!are!rejected!

on!grounds!of!psychological!and!intelligence!tests,!as!well!as!on!grounds!of!general!

health1.!Those!deemed!unfit! for!service!pay!an!additional!3%!of! income!tax! for!10!

years.!These!selection!effects!are!addressed!in!the!Empirical!Strategy!section!below.!

!

All!military!conscripts!live!in!the!barracks!of!their!military!unit!for!the!length!of!their!

service.!Service!typically!lasts!for!at!least!18!to!21!weeks.!Those!in!certain!divisions!

as! well! as! those! seeking! higher! ranks! accept! longer! service! lengths.! Division!

selection!is!typically!the!result!of!a!recruitment!officer’s!allocation.!It!is!unusual!for!a!

conscript!to!serve!in!the!same!canton!as!the!one!he!resides!in.!

!

Deferment! options! in! Switzerland! are! very! limited.! Those! in! civilian! service! serve!

50%!longer!than!those!in!the!military!who!are!instead!called!back!every!year!for!3?

week!refresher!courses.!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!Of!those!that!don’t!serve,!approximately!40%!are!rejected!on!grounds!of!physical!health,!40%!on!grounds!of!psychological!reasons,!and!20%!for!a!combination!of!the!two.!

! 12!

Due! to! the!highly! limited!number!of!officially! recognised! civilian! service! locations,!

many! individuals! opting! for! public! service! have! to! move! out! to! perform! their!

service1.!

!

All!conscripts!are!paid!for!their!service.!Those!with!jobs!earn!80%!of!the!income!that!

they!would!have!otherwise!missed!out!on,!on!top!of!a!basic!salary!of!4!to!30!SFr!per!

day.!Students!and!the!unemployed!receive!a!fixed!compensation!of!62!SFr!on!top!of!

the!basic!salary.!Special!circumstances!such!as!being!a!parent!allow!for!the!provision!

of!further!income.!

!

Causal*Mechanisms*

!

This!institutional!setting!implies!a!number!of!causal!streams!through!which!a!sibling!

may!be!affected.!It!is!not!clear!in!which!direction!the!overall!effect!can!be!expect!to!

act!due!to!the!number!of,!often!conflicting,!channels.!These!include:!

!

A*financial*factor:!The!fact!that!conscripts!are!sent!away!from!home!(meaning!they!

do! not! burden! their! household! with! everyday! expenses)! and! are! paid! for! their!

service,! reduces! the! financial! burden! a! household! has.! This! reduction! in! financial!

constraints! allows! families! to! spend! more! on! the! education! of! younger! siblings!

through!private!tutoring,!or!better!schools!that!are!likely!to!be!more!expensive.!This!

causal! stream! is! more! likely! to! result! in! positive! impacts! for! the! siblings! of!

conscripts!that!are!in!poorer!households.!

!

A* sibling* support* factor:! The! fact! that! conscripts! are! made! to! leave! their! home!

suggests! that! there! may! be! reductions! in! sibling! support! factors! such! as! the!

homework!help!older!brothers!provide!for!their!younger!siblings,!and!the!emotional!

support! afforded.! These! factors! may! be! more! likely! to! have! a! stronger! affect! for!

females.!!

!

Other!factors!resulting!from!a!sibling!being!conscripted!may!also!be!at!play,!such!as!

more!general!peer!effects!or!even!a!resulting!increase!in!housework.!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!Both!service!options!therefore!force!individuals!to!move!out,!and!thus!allow!the!measurement!of!sibling!externalities!by!treating!conscription!as!an!exogenous!shock!when!controlling!for!a!range!of!selection!factors.!

! 13!

!

All!of!these!impacts!are!unlikely!to!differ!between!those!that!have!a!sibling!join!the!

military!service!and!those!that!have!a!sibling!join!the!civilian!service!as!the!financial!

and!sibling?presence!factors!likely!at!play!are!the!same!across!the!two!groups.!

! !

! 14!

Data!

!

SHP*Dataset*

!

The!principal!dataset!in!use!is!the!Swiss!Household!Panel!(SHP).!The!SHP!is!a!yearly!

panel! that! features!12!waves! from!1999!to!2010!and!consists!of!9,018!households!

and!22,708!individuals.!All!individuals!in!a!household!are!surveyed!either!directly!or!

by! proxy.! Questions! in! the! panel! concern! a! range! of! socioeconomic! and! family!

outcomes.!Data!collection!initiated!with!a!sample!of!5,074!households!(with!12,931!

household! members).! In! 2004! a! second! sample! of! 2,538! households! (with! 6,569!

members)!was!added.!

!

Sample*Construction*

!

I! first!separate!out!males!and!females,!creating!a!sample!for!each!gender.! I!do!this,!

instead!of! creating! a! joint! sample! and! employing! gender! interaction! terms,! purely!

because! the! separate! sample! approach! is! easier! to! work! with! when! applying! the!

sample!manipulations!discussed!below.!

!

For!each!gender!sample,!I!use!real!values!instead!of!nominal!ones!to!guarantee!the!

income!measures!used!are!consistent!across!the!large!time!span!of!the!dataset.!

!

To! ensure! an! appropriate! comparison! group,! I! exclude! all! individuals! that! did!not!

have! at! least! one!male! sibling! of! age! 20! (the! required! age! of! service)! at! the! time!

when!they!have!the!option!of!dropping!out!open!to!them!(i.e.,!are!between!the!ages!

of!15!and!19).! I! also!exclude!non?Swiss! citizens,! as! their! siblings!are!not! called!up!

for,!or!even!allowed!to!complete,!compulsory!military!service!(CMS).!

!

To! ensure! that! the! causal! relationship! flows! in! the! direction! intended,! that! is,! the!

instance! of! a! sibling! being! conscripted! is! followed! by! and! affects! the! target!

individual’s!decision!on!whether!to!drop!out,!and!not!the!other!way!around,!I!drop!

all!observations!that!feature!the!target!individual!being!older!than!all!their!brothers.!

This!makes!sure! that! that! the!choice! for!dropping!out!of!high!school!occurs!either!

contemporaneously!with!or!just!after!a!brother!can!be!conscripted.!!

! 15!

!

From! here! I! drop! all! target! individuals! under! the! age! of! 20! (the! age! where!

individuals! should! have! completed! their! schooling)! such! that! the! number! of! older!

brothers!conscripted!can!be!compared!with!an!outcome!variable!examining!whether!

an!individual!has!completed!their!schooling!or!dropped!out.!

!

I! also! construct! an! ancillary! sample! (for! each! of! the! genders)! where! I! attempt! to!

examine! the! act! of! dropping! out! itself! at! the! time! a! sibling! is! conscripted! (i.e.,! a!

contemporaneous! effect).! I! do! this! by! restrict! these! samples! to! target! individuals!

aged!between!15! and!19! –! the! range!where! they! have! the! option! of! dropping! out!

from!high!school,!the!key!metric!in!my!analysis.!

!

Upon!examining!the!sample!in!detail,!I!find!that,!due!to!the!way!the!question!is!asked!

in!the!survey1,!only!1%!of!Swiss!males!at!age!20!reported!that!they!were!conducting!

their!service.!This!is!significantly!underreported.2!

!

As!the!variable!is!unsalvageable,!I!drop!it!from!my!sample!and!generate!a!predicted!

variable! examining! the! rate! of! conscription.! The! procedure! I! employ! to! do! this!

involves! the! use! of! a! second! dataset! and! a! two?sample! two?stage! least! squares!

approach!to!be!discussed!in!the!Empirical!Strategy!section!below.!Briefly,!it!involves!

predicting! the! probability! of! service! through! a! number! of! characteristics! in! one!

dataset!and!then!imputing!the!variable!in!the!second!dataset.3!

!

SLFS*dataset*

!

The!ancillary!dataset!used! for! the! imputation!procedure! is! the!Swiss!Labour!Force!

Survey!(SLFS).!Both!the!SLFS!and!the!SHP!strictly!adhere!to!international!definitions!

to! allow! for! comparisons! with! OECD! and! EU! data,! this! means! the! two! are! highly!

compatible.!!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!Individuals!are!queried!on!their!working!status!and!then!asked!if!they!missed!work!or!are!currently!not!working!due!to!CMS.!The!focus!on!employment!suggests!the!variable!is!significantly!biased!as!well!as!underreported.!2!Recall!that!approximately!60%!of!males!serve!in!the!military!and!10%!in!the!civilian!service.!3!As!will!be!discussed!in!the!Empirical!Strategy!section,!selecting!appropriate!variables!in!the!first!stage!can!allow!for!the!imputed!variable!to!also!be!instrumented!(therefore!reducing!bias).!

! 16!

The!SLFS!is!a!cross?sectional!dataset!that!is!conducted!on!a!yearly!basis!between!the!

years!of!1991!and!20091.!!

!

The! SLFS! targets! the! permanent! resident! population! aged! 15! and! older! and! is!

conducted! by! the! Federal! Statistical! Office! of! Switzerland.! In! total,! the! dataset!

contains!105,000!interviews.!

!

The!relevant!questions!on!conscription!in!this!survey!are!not!present!prior!to!2003.!I!

therefore!focus!my!analysis!on!the!years!that!follow!(in!both!datasets).!

!

The! SLFS! dataset! groups! military! service! and! civilian! service! together.! This! is!

unlikely!to!be!an!issue!because,!as!discussed!in!the!Institutional!Setting!section,!both!

imply!the!same!causal!mechanisms,!as!such;!the!outcomes!should!be!very!similar.!!

!

Summary*Statistics!

!

As!a!result!of!the!sample!construction!procedure,!the!number!of!individuals!drops!to!

174!(with!509!observations)!in!the!female!sample!and!209!(with!600!observations)!

in!the!male!sample.!

!

The!summary!statistics!for!the!key!male!and!female!samples!can!be!seen!in!Table!3!

below.!

!

The! mean! dropout! rate,! household! income,! and! the! percentage! of! individuals! in!

rural! areas! are! all! nationally! representative! averages! corroborated! with! census!

statistics!from!Switzerland’s!Federal!Statistical!Office.!

! !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!From!2010!onwards,!the!survey!is!conducted!on!a!continuous!basis.!

! 17!

!

Table!2:!SHP!Summary!Statistics!

!Males! Females!

Variables! Mean! Standard!Deviation! Mean! Standard!

Deviation!

Dropout! 0.125! 0.337! 0.!087! 0!.284!Age! 22.7! 2.42! 22.4! 2.22!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted16! 0.931! 0.594! 1.34! 0.939!Rural17! 0.155! 0.362! 0!.171! 0.378!

Household!Income18! 136,521! 117,421! 129,214! 80,377!No.!of!Brothers! 1.418! 0.629! 2.045! 1.01!

Individuals! 209! !! 174! !!Observations! 600!

!509! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

16!Imputed!17!Rural=1,!Urban/Suburban=0!18!2005!SFr!!

!

The!high!average!number!of!brothers! is!an!expected!result!of! the!sample!selection!

criteria’s!requirement!of!at!least!one!older!male!sibling!per!household.!

!

The! results! across! genders! are! very! similar,! and! as! such,! the! summary! statistics!

suggest!that!both!gender!specific!samples!are!nationally!representative.!

!

!

! !

! 18!

Empirical!strategy!

!

I! employ! a! number! of! strategies! to! address! three! key! concerns:! how! I! ensure! a!

causal! relationship,! how! I! minimise! bias/endogeneity! and! how! I! correct! the! data!

problems!resulting!from!the!under?reported!conscription!variable.!

!

Causality!

!

As! the!age!of!conscription! is!greater! than!the!age!of!high!school!graduation,!under!

normal! circumstances,! an! individual! with! a! younger! brother! cannot! have! their!

schooling! affected!when! that! brother! undertakes! his! service.! This! is! because! they!

would!likely!have!already!graduated!when!their!younger!brother!is!conscripted.! In!

this!case,!any!measurable!effect!would!largely!be!the!result!of!an!individual!dropping!

out! affecting! their! brothers! likelihood! of! service;! this! is! not! what! I! intend! to!

measure.!

!

As!briefly!pointed!out! in! the!Data! section,! I! ensure! that!any!measured!change! in!a!

target!individual’s!propensity!to!dropout!is!the!result!of!a!sibling!being!conscripted,!

and!not! the! result! of! reverse! causality,! by!only! examining! individuals! that!have! at!

least!one!older!brother.!This! ensures! that! that! the! choice! for!dropping!out!of!high!

school! occurs! either! contemporaneously! with! or! just! after! a! brother! can! be!

conscripted.!!

!

Causality,! however,! cannot!be! ensured!with!out!minimising! endogeneity.!As!noted!

earlier,! Swiss! conscription! is! subject! to! many! selection! effects,! as! such,! I! employ!

fixed! effects! regression! techniques! as!well! as! an! instrumental! variable! strategy! to!

control!for!these!and!argue!causality.!

!

Fixed*Effects*Regressions*

!

The! factors! determining! conscript! admission! (ability,! physical! fitness,! personality,!

and! political! views)! are! largely! fixed! at! the! individual! level,! especially! when!

considering!the!limited!time!scale!I!employ.!

!

! 19!

While! the! fact! that! I! examine! externalities! means! the! factors! leading! to! a! sibling!

being!conscripted!are! less! likely!to!be!the!factors!attributed!to!educational!success!

(therefore!affording!some! level!of!exogeneity),! it! is!notable! that!some!of! the!major!

determinants! of! educational! attainment! feature! high! levels! of! within?family!

correlations!(ability,!race,!etc.).!These!are!largely!fixed!and!are!similar!to!the!factors!

determining!conscript!admission.!

!

I!utilise!individual?level!fixed!effects!regressions!to!control!for!these!factors1!as!the!

individual?level! fixed!effects! should!be!a!more! conservative!model! and!encompass!

any!fixed!effects!at!the!household?level2.! Individual!fixed!effects!for!example!better!

control!for!the!number!of!siblings,!which!may!vary!in!a!household?level!fixed!effects!

model.!

!

To!control!for!broader!peer?level!effects!that!may!make!an!individual!more!likely!to!

avoid!CMS3,!I!also!include!canton?level!fixed!effects!dummies!in!every!regression.!

!

These!two!layers!of!fixed!effect!controls!should!result!in!more!exogenous!estimates!

for!the!effect!of!a!sibling!being!conscripted!on!an!individual’s!likelihood!of!dropping!

out!of!high!school.!

!

2S2SLS*Generation*Procedure*

!

As!outlined!in!the!Data!section!above,! the!variable!of! interest! in!the!SHP!dataset! is!

significantly! underreported! and! cannot! be! used! in! a! regression! analysis! without!

giving! rise! to! substantial! levels! of! bias.! The! SHP! conscription!variable! is! therefore!

abandoned!for!a!generated/predicted!alternative.!

!

To!predict!the!conscription!variable,!I!employ!a!two?sample!two?stage!least!squares!

(2S2SLS)!approach!where!the!chief!goal!is!to!generate!a!new!variable!as!opposed!to!

minimising!the!endogeneity!of!a!variable!through!the!use!of!an!instrument.1!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!It!is!very!important!to!control!for!the!factors!that!may!lead!individuals!to!attempt!to!intentionally!fail!an!entry!exam;!the!individual?level!fixed!effects!regression!implicitly!controls!for!the!political!factor!(among!others)!most!likely!to!determine!this.!2!For!certainty,!this!is!subject!to!a!robustness!test!in!the!Robustness!Tests!section!of!this!paper.!3!The!percentage!of!males!completing!service!varies!immensely!between!cantons.!Naturally,!more!densely!populated!city!cantons!such!as!Zurich!or!Geneva!experience!lower!levels!of!service!than!other!cantons.!

! 20!

!

The!generation!procedure!I!employ!can!be!split!into!3!main!steps:!

!

Step*1:!Upon!ensuing!that!the!two!datasets!feature!very!similar!variable!means!and!

distributions,!I!regress,!using!ordinary!least!squares,!the!conscription!variable!in!the!

SLFS! dataset! (containing! clean! information! on! service! rates)! against! a! number! of!

characteristics! that! are! present! in! both! datasets.! This! is! the! first! stage! regression,!

and!can!be!represented!as:!

!

N"=!!!+!!!γ!+!!!δ + ε!!

Where! N! is! the! conscription! variable,!!! !is! the! constant! term,!γ !is! a! vector! of!characteristics! present! in! both! datasets,!!!!is! the! vector! of! coefficients! for! these!characteristics,!δ!is!an!instrument,!!!!the!coefficient!for!that!instrument!and!ε!is!the!error!term.!

!!

Step*2:! I!use! the!estimated!coefficients,! represented!by!!!,!!!!and!!!,! from!the! first!stage!regression!to!compute!the!predicted!values!in!the!SHP!dataset.!This!generates!

the!variable!of!interest!in!the!panel!dataset,!therefore!allowing!the!use!of!the!panel!

techniques!outlined!earlier!to!minimise!endogeneity.!

!

Step*3:! I! utilise! a! linear! fixed! effects! regression! to! estimate! the! effect! of! having! a!

sibling!conscripted!on!the!high!school!dropout!rate.!This!can!be!represented!by!the!

equation:!

!

D"=!N* + !!γ"+"τ!!

Where! D! is! the! dropout! dummy,! N*! is! an! imputed! N,! and!τ!is! the! time?varying!component!of!the!error!term.!

!

We!can!see!that,! if!appropriate!variables!are!used!in!the!first!stage!regression,! this!

2S2SLS!procedure!can!be!used!to!simultaneously!generate!as!well!as!instrument!the!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!As!will!be!discussed!later,!selecting!suitable!variables!in!the!first!stage!regression!can!ensure!the!generated!variable!is!also!exogenous.!

! 21!

service! variable.! This! adds! another! layer! to! the! fixed! effects! strategies! outlined!

above!to!help!further!minimise!endogeneity.!

!Due!to!the!use!of!a!predicted!variable!in!the!second!stage!regression,!the!computed!

errors!in!the!must!be!adjusted.!A!number!of!papers!examine!this!second?stage!error!

adjustment! process,! these! include! Inoue! and! Solon! (2010),! Murphy! and! Topel!

(2002),!Angrist!and!Krueger!(1995)!and!Hole!(2006).!

!

Of! the!valid!options!available,! including!a!minimum!distance!estimator!and!a!delta!

method! approach,! I! follow! the! bootstrap! procedure! employed! by! Björklund! and!

Jäntti!(1997)!for!its!simplicity.!

!

The*Instrument*

!

Switzerland!has! recently!experienced!a! lower! rate!of! service! than! in!past!decades.!

This! rate! has! historically! centred! around! 80%! but! has! declined! to! approximately!

60%!with!the!introduction!of!civilian!service!options,!a!more!selective!military,!and!

a!lower!level!of!support!for!CMS.!This!rate!of!service!has!been!relatively!stable!over!

the!past!decade.!

!

In!my! first! stage! regression,! I! utilise! the! average! rate! of! service! to! instrument! the!

sibling! service! variable.! This! instrument! is! employed! by! Bedard! and! Deschenes!

(2006)! to! assess! the! long! term! health! effects! associated! with! military?induced!

smoking!in!World!War!II.!

!

Note!that!the!strength!of!this!instrument!increases!with!the!number!of!years/cross?

sections! used;! an! f?test! of! 12.13! demonstrates! that! it! surpasses! the! rule! of! thumb!

threshold! for! instrument! strength! advocated!by! Stock! and!Watson! (2003),!when! I!

only!utilise!the!7!years!of!available/compatible!data!in!the!SHP!and!SLFS.1! !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!first!stage!regression!output!can!be!found!in!Appendix!2A.!

! 22!

Results!

!

In* this* section* I* find* that,*overall,* there* is*a* strong*negative* shock* to* the*high*school*

completion* rate* of* females* when* a* male* sibling* is* conscripted.* Upon* dissecting* this*

effect,*I*find*that*less*wealthy*households*tend*to*experience*stronger*effects*and*that*

decreases* in* sibling* support* seem* to* explain* much* of* the* resulting* femalesNspecific*

increases*in*dropout*rates.*

!

I!begin!by!examining!females!that!have!had!the!opportunity!to!complete!high!school!

(that! is,! are! above! the! age! of! 19)! and! evaluate! the! effect! of! having! male! siblings!

conscripted!on!their!probability!of!dropping!out!of!high!school.!

!

As!discussed!previously,!I!only!examine!individuals!who!have!at!least!one!older!male!

sibling!to!ensure!appropriate!effect!directionality.!

!

I!control!for!a!number!of!factors!in!the!regressions!below,!these!include!the!size!of!

the! household! and! the! number! of! brothers! that! are! liable! for! service! –! these! are!

included! to! avoid! estimating! sibship! size! effects! as! part! of! the! ‘number!of! siblings!

conscripted’!variable.!

!

I!also!control!for!the!number!of!brothers!permanently!leaving!a!household!as!those!

at!an!age! likely! to!be!conscripted!are!also!at!an!age!where! they!are!more! likely! to!

move!out!–!this!ensures!the!externalities!associated!with!the!minimum!of!5!months!

of! service!are!estimated! separately! from!other! circumstances!where!a! sibling!may!

leave!the!household.!

!

Lastly,!I!include!canton?level!fixed!effects!dummies!(in!all!of!the!regressions)!as!well!

as! individual! level! fixed! effects! to! control! for! a! range! of! factors,! such! as! political!

leanings,!that!may!bias!results.!Note!that!the!22!canton!dummies!are!excluded!from!

the!Tables!below!and!can!be!found!in!the!Appendix!section.!

!

As!we!see!in!the!tables!below,!many!of!these!controls!drop!out!when!controlling!for!

individual?level!fixed!effects.!!

! 23!

Recall! from! the! Empirical! Strategy! section! that! I! employ! a! 2S2SLS! IV! strategy.! All!

Tables!in!this!section!contain!second!stage!regressions,!the!first!stage!output!can!be!

found!in!Appendix!2A.!

!

A! Hausman! test1!suggests! that! the! use! of! a! fixed! effects! model! is! not! necessary,!

possibly!due!to!the!effectiveness!of!the!instrument.!

!

In! the! regressions!shown! in!Table!3,!we!observe! that,! as!expected,! the!coefficients!

for! age! are! insignificant! as,! by! age! 20,! individuals! should! have! already! completed!

their!schooling!or!dropped!out!of!high!school.!!

!

!

Table!3:!Females!aged!20!and!above2!

!OLS3! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.0209***! 0.0231**! 0.0434**!

!(0.00779)! (0.00939)! (0.0194)!

Age! ?0.0459! ?0.0419! ?0.0602!

!(0.0352)! (0.0316)! (0.0366)!

Age!Squared! 0.000868! 0.000800! 0.00119!

!(0.000749)! (0.000671)! (0.000770)!

No.!of!Siblings! ?0.531! ?0.471! ?!

!(0.411)! (0.370)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.0172**! ?0.0179! ?!

!(0.00840)! (0.0112)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! 0.000220! 0.000826! ?!

!(0.0151)! (0.0198)!

!No.!of!Brothers! 0.569! 0.506! ?!

!(0.410)! (0.369)!

!Constant! 0.520! 0.462! 0.666!

!(0.410)! (0.368)! (0.435)!

Observations! 509! 509! 509!R?squared! 0.284! 0.2815! 0.0265!

No.!of!Individuals! ?!! 174! 174!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!P?value!=!0.7575,!therefore!we!cannot!reject!the!null!that!the!random!effects!model!is!consistent.!2!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3A.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!3!OLS!denotes!ordinary!least!squares,!RE!denotes!random!effects,!and!FE!denotes!fixed!effects!at!the!individual!level.!

! 24!

Table!3,!column!3!shows!that,!in!the!most!conservative!model,!having!more!siblings!

conscripted,! the! key! variable! in! the! analysis,! is! associated!with! an! increase! in! the!

dropout!rate!by!approximately!4%.!This!is!significant!at!the!5%!level.!!

!

Note! that! the!number!of! brothers! a! female!has! is! associated!with!no! effect! on! the!

probability! of! dropping! out! from! high! school.! Initially,! this! seems! to! support! the!

findings!of!Kaestner!(1997)!and!Hauser!and!Kuo!(1998)!that!there!is!no!evidence!for!

sibling!gender!composition!effects!(therefore!contesting!the!findings!of!Butcher!and!

Case! (1994)),! however,! it! is! possible! that! the! effect! found! by! Butcher! and! Case!

(1994)! is,! at! least! partially,! reflected! in! the! variable! measuring! the! number! of!

siblings!conscripted–!this!is!examined!in!detail!below.!

!

Table!4!follows!from!Table!3!by!employing!males!as!the!target!group.!!

!

As! in! the! female! specific! results,! a!Hausman! test1!suggests! a! fixed! effects!model! is!

not!needed.!!

!We!observe! that! the!key!variable! in! the!analysis,! the! coefficient! for! the!number!of!

siblings!conscripted!variable!is!insignificant!and!close!to!zero.!This!is!vastly!different!

to!the!female!case!and!therefore!suggests!that!the!causal!channels!are!more!likely!to!

involve! sibling! support! factors! than! financial! ones.! This! means! that! the! sibling!

composition! effects! identified! by! Butcher! and! Case! (1994)! are! likely,! at! least!

partially,! reflected! in! the! finding! that!males! leaving! to! complete! their! CMS! have! a!

detrimental!effect!on!their!sisters’!education.!

! !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!P?value!=!0.7575,!therefore!we!cannot!reject!the!null!that!the!random!effects!model!is!consistent.!

! 25!

!Table!4:!Males!aged!20!and!above1!

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.000378! ?0.00476! ?0.0108!

!(0.00564)! (0.00691)! (0.0101)!

Age! ?0.0167! ?0.0190! ?0.0199!

!(0.0237)! (0.0190)! (0.0203)!

Age!Squared! 0.000313! 0.000374! 0.000403!

!(0.000497)! (0.000400)! (0.000424)!

No.!of!Siblings! 0.0101! 0.000228! ?!

!(0.00751)! (0.0131)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.00317! ?0.00187! ?!

!(0.0130)! (0.0209)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! ?0.00623! ?0.0104! ?!

!(0.0145)! (0.0231)!

!No.!of!Brothers! 0.00893! 0.0155! ?!

!(0.0110)! (0.0174)!

!Constant! 0.234! 0.244! 0.260!

!(0.278)! (0.226)! (0.240)!

Observations! 600! 600! 600!R?squared! 0.0366! 0.0703! 0.0012!

No.!of!Individuals! ?!! 209! 209!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3B.!Standard!errors!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!!

!

From! the! analysis! so! far,! it! is! clear! that! there! exist! some! negative! externalities!

associated!with!CMS!for! females.!This!result!corroborates!the! findings!of!Cipollone!

and!Rosolia!(2007)!and!suggests!that!the!papers! in!the!CMS!literature!that!employ!

women! as! a! control! group,! namely! Card! and! Lemieux! (2001)! and! Paloyo! (2010),!

may!underestimate!the!effects!associated!with!CMS!on!males.!

!

In! order! to! further! probe! into! the! sibling! externalities! literature,! I! conduct! an!

analysis!of!the!contemporaneous!effects!associated!with!CMS!–!this! is!necessary!as!

the!sibling?support!hypothesis!should!involve!a!drop!in!support!and!therefore!result!

in!an!increase!in!the!dropout!propensity!at!the!time!a!sibling!is!conscripted.!

!

! 26!

In! Table! 5,! I! attempt! to! observe! the! act! of! dropping! out! itself! by! focussing! on!

individuals!that!are!able!to!do!so.!I!therefore!focus!my!analysis!on!those!between!the!

ages!of!15!(the!minimum!school!leaving!age!in!Switzerland)!and!19!(the!age!where!

most!individuals!should!have!completed!high!school).!

!

In! this! contemporaneous! effect! analysis,! I! use! a! dummy! variable! that! identifies!

whether! a! sibling! is! conscripted! in! the! current! year! as! opposed! to! examining! the!

number!of!siblings!conscripted.!

!

It!is!notable!that,!in!this!contemporaneous!case,!a!Hausman!test,!yielding!a!p?value!of!

0.000,!shows!that!individual!level!fixed!effects!are!necessary!to!reduce!bias.!This!is!

likely! due! to! the! fact! that! the! instrument! is! less! effective! in! the! contemporaneous!

case!as!it!requires!a!larger!time!range.!This!may!also!help!explain!the!high!errors!for!

the!key!(instrumented)!variable!in!the!OLS!and!random?effects!regressions!in!Table!

5!below.!!

!

The!age!coefficients!in!the!most!conservative!model,!the!fixed!effects!regression,!are!

highly!significant!and!imply!that!an!individual!is!most!likely!to!dropout!at!the!age!of!

16.!

!In! table! 5,! we! observe! that,! as! before,! having! a! sibling! leave! to! undertake! CMS!

negatively!impacts!the!probability!of!completing!high!school.!!

! !

! 27!

!

Table!5:!Females!aged!15!to!191!

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Sibling!Conscripted! ?0.00242! ?0.00242! 0.112**!

!(0.0241)! (0.0241)! (0.0459!)!

Age! 1.307***! 1.307***! 1.475***!

!(0.300)! (0.300)! (0.311)!

Age!Squared! ?0.0392***! ?0.0392***! ?0.0452***!

!(0.00887)! (0.00887)! (0.00924)!

No.!of!Siblings! 10.75***! 0.0998***! ?!

!(2.522)! (0.0270)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.126***! ?0.126***! ?!

!(0.0265)! (0.0265)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! 0.0876**! 0.0876**! ?!

!(0.0422)! (0.0422)!

!No.!of!Brothers! ?10.69***! ?0.0467! ?!

!(2.522)! (0.0389)!

!Constant! ?10.65***! ?10.65***! ?11.85***!

!(2.523)! (2.523)! (2.618)!

Observations! 612! 612! 612!R?squared! 0.302! 0.188! 0.0379!

No.!of!Individuals!!

233! 233!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3C.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!!

!

An!identical!analysis!is!conducted!for!men!(see!Appendix!3D);!this!shows,!as!in!the!

non?contemporaneous!case,!no!discernable!effect!of!having!a!sibling!conscripted.!

!

I!now!move!on!to!further!analyse!the!causal!channels!leading!to!the!increase!in!the!

dropout!rate!for!females.!

!

To!observe!if!there!are!any!wealth!or!income!effects,!I!segment!the!sample!in!Table!3!

into! 2! groups,! an! upper! class! and! a! middle/lower?class2,! and! conduct! individual?

level!fixed!effects!regressions,!the!results!of!which!are!shown!in!Table!6!below.!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2!!The!upper!class!is!defined!as!households!earning!more!that!150,000!SFr,!while!those!in!the!lower/middle?class!are!defined!as!households!earning!less!than!that.!!

! 28!

!

Table!6:!Family!incomes!for!females!aged!20!and!above1!

!The!Lower/Middle!Class! The!Upper!Class!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.0586**! 0.0238!

!(0.0208)! (0.0340)!

Age! 0.00324! ?0.0803!

!(0.0426)! (0.0549)!

Age!Squared! ?0.000104! 0.00161!

!(0.000889)! (0.00117)!

Constant! ?0.118! 0.931!

!(0.506)! (0.621)!

Observations! 284! 225!R?squared! 0.0701! 0.0017!

No.!of!Individuals! 127! 103!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3E.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!Individual!level!fixed!effects!are!employed!for!both!regressions.!!

!

This! analysis! demonstrates! that! some! income?related! effects! are! present! when!

siblings!are!conscripted,!as!females!in!less!wealthy!families!experience!a!significant!

increase!of!5%! in! their!propensity! to!dropout!of!high! school!while! those! in! richer!

families!experience!no!discernable!effects.!

!

As!in!Table!7!below,!measurable!income!related!effects!also!exist!for!males!(and!are!

significant!at! the!5%!level),!however! it! is!notable!that! the!male!specific!coefficient,!

unlike! that! for! females,! is! negative,! that! is,! having! a! sibling! conscripted! benefits!

males!in!terms!of!a!lower!dropout!rate.!

!

One! possible! hypothesis! that! explains! the! discrepancy! between! genders! is! that!

females!experience!support!effects!that!are!correlated!with!family!income!levels.!To!

investigate! this!hypothesis! I! split! the! lower/middle?class! females! into! two!groups:!

those! that! identified! themselves! as! having! experienced! a! reduction! in! emotional!

support! from! their! family! and! those! that! identified! themselves! as! having!

experienced!either!no!change!or!an!increase!in!support.! !

! 29!

!

Table!7:!Family!incomes!for!males!aged!20!and!above1!

!The!Lower/Middle!Class! The!Upper!Class!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! ?0.0420**! 0.00923!

!(0.0173)! (0.0156)!

Age! ?0.0113! ?0.0435!

!(0.0329)! (0.0333)!

Age!Squared! 0.000250! 0.000854!

!(0.000684)! (0.000700)!

Constant! 0.177! 0.535!

!(0.393)! (0.389)!

Observations! 302! 296!R?squared! 0.0016! 0.013!

No.!of!Individuals! 148! 131!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3F.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!Individual!level!fixed!effects!are!used!for!both!regressions.!!

!

Note!that!due!to!the!limited!size!of!the!sample,!I!reduce!the!age!cut?off!to!18!years!in!

the! following! regressions.! I! argue! that! this! is! unlikely! to! increase! bias! by! much!

because,!as!shown!previously,! individuals! tend!to!dropout!at! the!age!of!16,! that! is,!

earlier!rather!than!later.!

! !

! 30!

!

Table!8:!Emotional!support!for!females!aged!18!and!above!in!low/middleLincome!families1!

!Decrease!in!Emotional!Support! No!Change/Increase!in!Emotional!Support!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.214**! ?0.113**!

!(0.0771)! (0.0452)!

Age! 0.0493! ?0.159!

!(0.213)! (0.100)!

Age!Squared! ?0.00157! 0.00334!

!(0.00465)! (0.00215)!

Constant! ?0.707! 2.095*!

!(2.343)! (1.120)!

Observations! 117! 262!R?squared! 0.387! 0.338!

No.!of!Individuals! 91! 145!! ! !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!3G.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!Individual!level!fixed!effects!are!used!for!both!regressions.!!

!

Here! we! see! that,! in! middle! or! low?income! households,! those! who! experience! a!

decrease! in! emotional! support! as! a! result! of! a! sibling! being! conscripted! are!much!

more! likely! to! dropout,! while! those! who! experience! no! change! or! an! increase! in!

emotional!support!are!less!likely!to!do!so.!Both!of!these!findings!are!significant!at!the!

5%!level.!

!

A! comparison!of! emotional! support! in!wealthier! families! (Appendix!3H)! shows!no!

discernable!effect,!suggesting!that!this!form!of!support!may!not!be!as!critical!in!these!

households!as! it! is! in! less!wealthy!ones.!This! link! is!upheld!by!a!number!of!papers!

examining! support! across! family! incomes! (Wight,! Botticello! et! al.! 2006;! North,!

Holahan!et!al.!2008).!

!

Due!to!the!limited!sample!sizes,!it!is!not!possible!to!separate!the!effect!of!increased!

support!from!the!effect!of!increased!income!in!this!analysis.!

!

In!summary,!although!it!seems!clear!that!some!income!effects!are!present,!they!seem!

to!be!outweighed!by! the! support!effects! for! females! (as! seen! in!Table!3,! analysing!

! 31!

the!overall! effects).!Males!do!not! seem! to!be!affected!by! these! support! effects! and!

only! benefit! from! the! income! effects! when! in! the! lower! end! of! the! wealth!

distribution.!

!

It! seems! very! plausible! that! the! gender! composition! effects! found! by!Butcher! and!

Case!(1994)!are,!at!least!partially,!a!manifestation!of!sibling!support!effects.!

! !

! 32!

Robustness!Checks!

!

In!this!section!I!perform!four!robustness/sensitivity!tests! to!ensure!the!results!are!

consistent!and!not!of!a!spurious!nature.!The!first!of!these!is!a!falsification!exercise,!

the!second!an!examination!of!the!individual?level!fixed!effects!assumption,!the!third!

an! analysis! of! the! base! year,! and! the! fourth! a! robustness! check! for! the! sibling!

support!finding.!

!

Falsification!

!

The! first! test,! the! falsification!exercise,! shown! in!Table!9!below! involves!assessing!

the!effect!of!a!sibling!being!conscripted!if!that!sibling!lives!in!a!different!household!

(due!to!parental!divorce,!for!example).!If!the!externality!relationship!is!not!spurious,!

there!should!be!no!discernable!effect!to!having!a!brother!conscripted,!as!household!

level!effects!should!be!largely!contained!within!the!household!(i.e.,!a!sibling!already!

outside!the!households!cannot!affect!wealth!or!support!factors)!

! !

! 33!

!Table!9:!Females!aged!20!and!above!in!different!households1!

!OLS2! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! ?0.00512! ?0.00512! 0.0140!

!(0.00666)! (0.00666)! (0.0286)!

Age! ?0.0283! ?0.0283! ?0.0694!

!(0.0307)! (0.0307)! (0.0495)!

Age!Squared! 0.000533! 0.000533! 0.00140!

!(0.000655)! (0.000655)! (0.00105)!

No.!of!Siblings! 0.0215**! 0.0215**! ?!

!(0.00937)! (0.00937)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.00337! ?0.00337! ?!

!(0.0140)! (0.0140)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! ?0.0165! ?0.0165! ?!

!(0.0169)! (0.0169)!

!No.!of!Brothers! 0.0219*! 0.0219*! ?!

!(0.0130)! (0.0130)!

!Constant! 0.386! 0.386! 0.795!

!(0.356)! (0.356)! (0.568)!

Observations! 280! 280! 280!R?squared! 0.2012! 0.2012! 0.0412!

No.!of!Individuals! ?! 109! 109!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!4A.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!2!OLS!denotes!ordinary!least!squares,!RE!denotes!random!effects,!and!FE!denotes!fixed!effects!at!the!individual!level.!!!We! observe! that! the! coefficient! for! the! number! of! siblings! conscripted! variable! is!

insignificant!and!close! to! zero!across!all! three!models! in!Table!9.!This! falsification!

exercise! show! that! the! causal! effects! found!are! robust! and! therefore! suggests! that!

the!results!in!Table!3!are!unlikely!to!be!spurious.!

!

Individual*V.S.*Household*Fixed*Effects*

*

As!outlined! in! the!Empirical! Strategy! section,! I! utilise! individual?level! fixed! effects!

over! household?level! fixed! effects! because! I! argue! that! the! individual?level! effects!

largely! encompass! the! household! level! effects! and! are!more! conservative! because!

they!implicitly!control!for!factors!that!household?level!fixed!effects!do!not.!I!now!test!

! 34!

the! significance! of! this! assumption!by! comparing! the! two! schemes! for! each!of! the!

genders.!

!Table!10:!Individual!V.S.!household!level!fixed!effects1!

!Females! Males!

!Ind.!FE2! HH!FE! Ind.!FE! HH!FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)! (4)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.0434**! 0.0313*! ?0.0108! ?0.00726!

!(0.0194)! (0.0167)! (0.0101)! (0.0129)!

Age! ?0.0602! ?0.0462! ?0.0199! ?0.0347!

!(0.0366)! (0.0337)! (0.0203)! (0.0255)!

Age!Squared! 0.00119! 0.000921! 0.000403! 0.000694!

!(0.000770)! (0.000712)! (0.000424)! (0.000532)!

No.!of!Siblings! ?! 0.0121! ?! 0.00487!

!!! (0.521)! !! (0.0658)!

Siblings!Left!Household! ?! ?0.0406! ?! 0.0117!

!!! (0.254)! !! (0.133)!

Brothers!Left!Household! ?! ?0.0298! ?! ?0.00946!

!!! (0.365)! !! (0.245)!

No.!of!Brothers! ?! 0.0529! ?! ?0.00902!

!!! (0.344)! !! (0.177)!

Constant! 0.666! 0.557! 0.260! 0.434!

!(0.435)! (0.443)! (0.240)! (0.510)!

Observations! 509! 509! 600! 600!R?squared! 0.063! 0.695! 0.009! 0.459!

No.!of!Individuals! 174! ?! 209! ?!No.!of!Households! ?! 153!! ?! 177!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!4B.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!2!Ind.!FE!denotes!individual?level!fixed!effects,!HH!FE!denotes!household?level!fixed!effects!!!Note!that!the!variables!for!the!number!of!brothers!and!the!number!of!sisters!do!not!

drop! out! completely! in! the! household?level! fixed! effects! regressions.! The! two!

regressions! show! highly! similar! regression! outcomes,! in! terms! of! both! the!

coefficients! and! the! errors.! One! key! difference! is! in! the! number! of! siblings!

conscripted! variable! for! females.! The! error! coefficients! here! are! slightly! higher! in!

the!household?level!case,!being!significant!at!the!10%!level!(and!just!insignificant!at!

5%).! Note! that,! however,! the! coefficients! for! both! are! within! each! other’s! 95%!

confidence!intervals.!

!

! 35!

I!therefore!conclude!that,!due!to!the!very!small!differences!between!the!two!models!

and!the! fact! that! the! individual?level! fixed!effects!model!seems!to!control! for!more!

(i.e.,!is!more!conservative),!the!individual?level!fixed!effects!model!is!an!appropriate!

choice.!

!

Panel*Attrition*

!

I!now!move!on!to!examine!whether!any!attrition!in!the!panel!could!have!affected!the!

results.!Recall!that!I! largely!base!the!analysis!on!households!that!began!completing!

the!survey!in!2004.!

!

I! test! for! any! attrition! effects! by! recreating! this! analysis! with! households! that!

undertake! the! first! of! their! panel! surveys! in! 1999,! while! still! examining! only! the!

years!of!2003!to!2009.!This!larger!time!range!means!this!sample!is!much!more!likely!

to!feature!attrition!related!effects!than!the!sample!employed!in!the!results!section.!

! !

! 36!

!Table!11:!Females!aged!20!and!above,!1999!households1!

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.0247! 0.0317*! 0.0575*!

!(0.0151)! (0.0180)! (0.0291)!

Age! ?0.0665! ?0.0757! ?0.105!

!(0.0648)! (0.0609)! (0.0724)!

Age!Squared! 0.00122! 0.00145! 0.00210!

!(0.00139)! (0.00130)! (0.00155)!

No.!of!Siblings! ?0.0112! ?0.00953!!

!(0.0200)! (0.0192)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.0190! ?0.0249**!!

!(0.0213)! (0.0105)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! 0.0754***! 0.0726***!!

!(0.0286)! (0.0268)!

!No.!of!Brothers! ?0.0122! 0.799!!

!(0.0386)! (0.699)!

!Constant! 0.819! 0.730! 1.166!

!(0.702)! (0.749)! (0.823)!

Observations! 280! 280! 280!R?squared! 0.400! 0.374! 0.072!

No.!of!Individuals!!

90! 90!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!4C.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!!!In!the!table!above!we!can!see!that!most!of! the!control!coefficients! follow!the!same!

sign!and!significance!levels!as!those!in!Table!3.!For!the!key!variable!in!the!analysis,!

the! number! of! siblings! conscripted,!we! also! see! a! very! similar! coefficient! (see! the!

most!conservative!model!in!column!3!in!the!table!above),!however,!we!also!observe!

a!drop!in!significance!(with!all!three!coefficients!revolving!around!the!10%!level!of!

statistical!significance).!

!

This! suggests! that! there!may!be!some!small!attrition!related!effects! in! the!sample.!

This!means! it! is! important! to!use!households! that!began! completing! the! survey! in!

later!years!to!ensure!these!effects!are!minimised.!

! !

! 37!

Sibling*Support*Robustness!

!

I! now!move! on! to! the! final! test,! this! involves! testing! the! robustness! of! the! sibling!

support!results!by!replacing!the!subjective!measure!of!sibling!support!with!one!that!

is!less!so;!I!compare!those!who!speak!Italian!with!who!do!not!(i.e.,!French!or!German!

speakers).!

!

This! measure! is! employed! because! a! number! of! studies! find! that! those! from! an!

Italian! background! feature! much! closer! family! ties! (and! therefore! rely! more! on!

familial! support! factors)! than! those! from! French! or! German! backgrounds! (Reher!

2005;!Giuliano!2007),!this!means,!when!a!sibling!is!conscripted,!they!are!much!more!

likely! to! experience! a! loss! in! familial! support.! Those! from! French! or! German!

backgrounds!would!rely!more!on!other!forms!of!peer!based!support,!such!as!friends,!

and! should! not! experience! as! large! a! drop! in! support! from! a! sibling! leaving! to!

complete!CMS.!

!

Below,!I!employ!the!same!structure!as!that!of!Table!8,!replacing!the!sibling!support!

factor!with!a!language/cultural!one.!

! !

! 38!

!

!Table!12:!Individuals!aged!18!and!above,!by!primary!language1!

!Italian! French/German!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.341! ?0.0409*!

!(0.291)! (0.0241)!

Age! 0.0109! ?0.0580!

!(1.267)! (0.0491)!

Age!Squared! ?0.000448! 0.00125!

!(0.0259)! (0.00107)!

Constant! ?0.558! 0.753!

!(14.53)! (0.552)!

Observations! 16! 456!R?squared! 0.890! 0.202!

No.!of!Individuals! 7! 199!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!The!canton!dummies!for!these!regressions!are!shown!in!appendix!2A.!Standard!errors!are!bootstrapped!and!are!in!parentheses.!Asterisks!denote!p?values:!***!p<0.01,!**!p<0.05,!*!p<0.1!!

!

Of!the!three!official!languages,!Italian?speaking!households!are!by!far!the!minority!in!

Switzerland;! this! is! reflected! in! the! very! small! sample! in! Table! 11,! column! 1.! I,!

therefore,!cannot!make!any!reasonable!inference!for!Italian?speaking!households.!!

!

French!and!German!speakers,!however,!make!up!the!majority!in!Switzerland!and,!as!

can!be!seen!in!column!2!of!table!11!above,!the!coefficient!is!negative!(i.e.,!females!in!

lower! income! French! and! German! speaking! houses! benefit! in! terms! of! a! lower!

dropout!propensity)!and!is!significant!at!the!10%!level.!

!

This!table!also!seems!to!help!(partially)!explain!the!discrepancy!between!Cipollone!

and!Rosolia!(2007)!and!Maurin!and!Xenogiani!(2007)!as!differences!between!French!

and!Italian!levels!of!sibling!support.!

!

This!seems! to!corroborate! the! finding! that!peer!support! is!a!strong! factor!because!

the! strong,! positive! effect! of! support! seems! to! diminish! as! the! coefficient! changes!

sign.! This! suggests! that! income! related! factors! are! more! at! play! for! French! and!

German!speakers!in!lower!income!households.!

! 39!

Conclusion!

!

This!thesis!has!two!main!goals,!to!estimate!the!externalities!associated!with!CMS!on!

a!micro!(familial)!level!that!may!be!more!robust!to!country!level!heterogeneity!and!

to!examine!the!sibling!level!externalities!on!education.!!

!

*Summary*of*Results!

!

In!this!thesis,!I!find!that,!overall;!there!are!strong!negative!educational!externalities!

associated! with! compulsory! military! service.! Specifically,! I! find! that! females!

experience! higher! high?school! dropout! propensities!when! an! older!male! sibling! is!

conscripted.!

!

Upon!breaking!down!this!effect,!I!find!that!the!female?based!effects!are!strongest!in!

less! wealthy! families.! I! find! that! much! of! this! can! be! explained! by! decreases! in!

sibling! support! resulting! from! a! sibling! temporarily! leaving! the! household.! This!

effect! seems! to! outweigh! any! financial! effects,! which! are! expected! to! act! in! the!

opposite!direction!(i.e.,!result!in!a!reduction!in!the!propensity!to!dropout).!

!

Males! in! less!wealthy! households! seem! to! experience! a! decrease! in! their! dropout!

propensity!as!a!result!of!a!sibling!being!conscripted.!There!does!not!seem!to!be!any!

evidence!of!the!sibling!support!effect!for!males.!

!

Implications*

!

These!findings!have!a!range!of!implications!for!conscription!policy.!

!

Card! and! Cardoso! (2011)! find! that! CMS! has! a! positive! effects! for! the! poor;! this! is!

attributed!to!gains!in!human!capital!that!may!not!be!otherwise!obtained!due!to!the!

poor’s’!lower!schooling!prospects.!With!this!thesis,!I!extend!this!analysis!to!examine!

the! externalities! associated! with! those! in! less! wealthy! households.! I! find! a!

segregating!effect!where!males!benefit!when!a!sibling! is!conscripted!while! females!

are! hurt.! This! finding,! as! well! as! the! overall! finding! that! conscription! may! hurt!

females! (who!are!not! liable! for! service),! suggests! the! externalities! associated!with!

! 40!

CMS! may! be! deemed! damaging! to! society! and! Informs! the! policy! debate! in!

Switzerland.!

!

As! these! findings! employ! a! household! level! approach,! they! should! be! highly!

generalizable! to! nations! with! similar! cultures! and! conscription! regimes,! most!

notably! Austria.! The! fact! that! sibling! support! factors! are! so! powerful,! even! in!

Switzerland!where!family!ties!are!less!prominent!than!other!countries,!suggests!that!

a! part! of! these! findings! may! be! generalizable! to! other! OECD! countries! that! also!

maintain!CMS!policies.!!

!

The!result!that!social!support!effects!account!for!much!of!the!negative!outcomes!for!

women,!however,!does!not!seem!to!have!clear!policy!implications.!It!is!possible!that!

a!system!where!conscripts!are!not!sent!away! to! live! in!barracks!may!reduce! these!

support!effects,!however,!it!is!not!certain!whether!the!increased!travel,!among!other!

changes,! would! hurt! those! conscripted! more! than! it! helps! reduce! the! negative!

externalities.!!

!

Limitations*and*Future*Research!

!

One!major! omission! in! this! analysis! is! the! effect! of! females! being! conscripted! on!

their!siblings’!educational!outcomes.!As!Switzerland!does!not!conscript!females,!this!

effect!is!not!measurable,!as!such;!the!gender!effects!I!measure!only!show!one!side!of!

the! sibling! relationship.! Israel! is! the! only! country! in! the! OECD! that! conscripts!

females,! depending! on! the! availability! of! suitable! data;! future! research! may! be!

conducted!here.!

!

I!do!not!explicitly!examine!the!‘financial!constraints’!causal!relationship!as!the!data!

on!household!level!income!is!not!of!a!fine!enough!grain!to!do!so!effectively.!Similarly,!

as! the! effects! of! conscription! seem! to! differ! across! income! groups,! a! quantile!

regression! approach! may! be! appropriate! to! examine! these! distributional! effects,!

however,! cleaner! data! must! be! obtained.! This! is! an! option! for! future! research! is!

suitable!data!can!be!found.!

!

! 41!

The!finding!of!a!segregating!effect!where!males!benefit!when!a!sibling!is!conscripted!

while! females! are! hurt! can! be!magnified! if,! as! in! Card! and! Cardoso! (2011),!males!

from!poorer!backgrounds!reap!benefits!from!being!conscripted.!More!research!must!

be!done!to!assess! this!effect! in! full!by!moving!beyond!the!household! level! focus!of!

this!thesis,!into!a!broader!approach!similar!to!the!country!specific!studies!employed!

in!the!direct?effects!literature!(see!Tables!1!and!Appendix!1A).!

!Finally,!since!no!paper!seems!to!have!examined!the!direct!effects!of!CMS!on!the!

conscripts!themselves!for!Switzerland!(as!in!Table!1),!this!would!to!be!a!relatively!

important!area!to!examine!given!the!high!policy!relevance.! !

! 42!

Appendix!!Appendix*1A:*Other*CMS*Effects!!

Papers!Examining!the!Direct!Effect!of!CMS!on!Health!and!Crime!

Paper! Country! Effect!

Bedard!and!Deschenes!(2006)!

U.S.A.! Strong!negative!effect!on!veteran!health!due!to!cigarette!subsidies!

Dobkin!(2009)! U.S.A.! No!effect!on!health!

Autor!et!al.!(2011)! U.S.A.! Negative!effect!on!veteran!health!

Galliani!et!al.!(2011)! Argentina! Concripts!more!likely!to!commit!crimes;!small!negative!effect!on!employment!and!earnings!

!

! 43!

Appendix*2A:*Example*First*Stage*Regression!!

!OLS!

!Conscription!Variable! Coefficient! Standard!Error!Age! 0.649***! 0.130!

Age!Squared! ?0.0152***! 0.00302!Yearly!Percentage!of!Conscripts! 1.069***! 0.312!

Berne! 0.0715**! 0.0288!Lucerne! 0.0391! 0.0353!

Uri! 0.00683! 0.0823!Schwytz! 0.167***! 0.0576!Obwald! 0.140! 0.0893!Nidwald! 0.000624! 0.0937!

Zoug! 0.0865! 0.0614!Fribourg! 0.0462! 0.0406!Soleure! 0.0738! 0.0467!B?Leville! 0.148**! 0.0619!

B?Campagne! 0.0436! 0.0453!Schaffhouse! 0.127! 0.0969!Appenzelle! 0.0849! 0.0823!Appenzelli! ?0.0265! 0.0953!Saintgall! 0.0758**! 0.0344!Grisons! 0.0584! 0.0498!Argovie! 0.0546*! 0.0329!

Thurgovie! 0.0943**! 0.0475!Tessin! 0.172***! 0.0303!Vaud! ?0.0114! 0.0314!Valais! 0.103**! 0.0433!

Neuchatel! ?0.00734! 0.0623!Constant! ?6.960***! 1.386!

Observations! 4,248!!R?squared! 0.021!!!

!! !

! 44!

Appendix*3A:*Canton*Dummies,*Females*Aged*20*and*Above!!

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Berne! 0.00449! 0.00594! ?0.0533!

!(0.0171)! (0.0216)! (0.139)!

Lucerne! 0.0230! 0.0377! 0.350***!

!(0.0206)! (0.0257)! (0.106)!

Schwytz! 0.00534! 0.00245! ?0.0641!

!(0.0208)! (0.0269)! (0.154)!

Obwald! ?0.0239! ?0.0116! ?!

!(0.0486)! (0.0587)!

!Nidwald! 0.0298! 0.0248! ?!

!(0.0353)! (0.0523)!

!Zoug! 0.0315! 0.0319! ?!

!(0.0443)! (0.0515)!

!Fribourg! 0.00189! 0.00723! ?0.0413!

!(0.0257)! (0.0342)! (0.191)!

Soleure! ?0.00773! ?0.00892! ?!

!(0.0247)! (0.0348)!

!B?Leville! 0.00267! 0.00988! ?0.0164!

!(0.0299)! (0.0379)! (0.120)!

B?Campagne! ?0.00619! 0.000507! ?0.00249!

!(0.0250)! (0.0328)! (0.151)!

Appenzelle! 0.00377! 0.00921! ?!

!(0.0404)! (0.0528)!

!Saintgall! ?0.0132! ?0.00957! 0.00402!

!(0.0221)! (0.0273)! (0.0825)!

Grisons! 0.119***! 0.140***! 0.360***!

!(0.0420)! (0.0446)! (0.0885)!

Argovie! 0.0153! 0.0139! ?0.0167!

!(0.0181)! (0.0224)! (0.0870)!

Thurgovie! 0.00348! 0.00833! 0.0179!

!(0.0295)! (0.0384)! (0.117)!

Tessin! 0.268***! 0.273***! ?!

!(0.0271)! (0.0345)!

!Vaud! 0.0200! 0.0189! ?0.0764!

!(0.0176)! (0.0222)! (0.165)!

Valais! 0.0258! 0.0243! ?0.0684!

!(0.0242)! (0.0297)! (0.171)!

Neuchatel! 0.00719! 0.00986! ?0.0511!

!(0.0215)! (0.0255)! (0.183)!

!!

! 45!

Appendix*3B:*Canton*Dummies,*Males*Aged*20*and*Above**

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Berne! ?0.0203! ?0.0274! ?!

!(0.0129)! (0.0212)!

!Lucerne! ?0.0160! ?0.0189! 0.00240!

!(0.0130)! (0.0216)! (0.0357)!

Uri! ?0.0271! ?0.0293! ?!

!(0.0242)! (0.0397)!

!Schwytz! ?0.0131! ?0.0121! ?!

!(0.0249)! (0.0394)!

!Obwald! ?0.0101! ?0.0176! ?!

!(0.0218)! (0.0308)!

!Zoug! ?0.0390! ?0.0458! ?!

!(0.0375)! (0.0517)!

!Fribourg! ?0.0185! ?0.0217! ?!

!(0.0163)! (0.0313)!

!Soleure! ?0.0328! ?0.0376! ?!

!(0.0371)! (0.0581)!

!B?Leville! ?0.0232! ?0.0216! ?!

!(0.0295)! (0.0435)!

!B?Campagne! ?0.0166! ?0.0240! ?!

!(0.0188)! (0.0323)!

!Schaffhouse! 0.148***! 0.0751**! ?0.0138!

!(0.0343)! (0.0370)! (0.0557)!

Appenzelle! ?0.00721! ?0.0103! ?!

!(0.0471)! (0.0787)!

!Appenzelli! ?0.0170! ?0.0274! ?!

!(0.0809)! (0.0911)!

!Saintgall! ?0.0151! ?0.0153! 0.00506!

!(0.0132)! (0.0198)! (0.0505)!

Grisons! 0.0617**! 0.0736*! ?!

!(0.0248)! (0.0389)!

!Argovie! ?0.0202! ?0.0234! ?0.00425!

!(0.0130)! (0.0208)! (0.0674)!

Thurgovie! ?0.0205! ?0.0220! ?!

!(0.0315)! (0.0408)!

!Tessin! ?0.0144! ?0.0172! ?0.00744!

!(0.0193)! (0.0269)! (0.0480)!

Vaud! ?0.0131! ?0.0184! ?!

!(0.0155)! (0.0266)!

!Valais! ?0.0124! ?0.0176! ?!

!(0.0198)! (0.0351)!

!Neuchatel! ?0.0163! ?0.0143! ?!

!(0.0201)! (0.0354)!

!

! 46!

Appendix*3C:*Canton*Dummies,*Females*Aged*15*to*19**

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Berne! ?0.129**! ?0.129**! ?!

!(0.0547)! (0.0547)!

!Lucerne! ?0.0831! ?0.0831! ?!

!(0.0637)! (0.0637)!

!Uri! ?0.308! ?0.308! ?!

!(0.218)! (0.218)!

!Schwytz! ?0.0382! ?0.0382! ?!

!(0.0922)! (0.0922)!

!Obwald! ?0.169! ?0.169! ?!

!(0.139)! (0.139)!

!Zoug! 0.105! 0.105! ?!

!(0.141)! (0.141)!

!Fribourg! 0.455***! 0.455***! 0.200!

!(0.0982)! (0.0982)! (0.465)!

Soleure! 0.148*! 0.148*! ?!

!(0.0836)! (0.0836)!

!B?Leville! ?0.157! ?0.157! ?!

!(0.112)! (0.112)!

!B?Campagne! ?0.187*! ?0.187*! ?!

!(0.112)! (0.112)!

!Schaffhouse! ?0.0966! ?0.0966! ?!

!(0.210)! (0.210)!

!Appenzelle! ?0.137! ?0.137! ?!

!(0.114)! (0.114)!

!Saintgall! ?0.0936! ?0.0936! ?!

!(0.0646)! (0.0646)!

!Grisons! 0.285**! 0.285**! ?!

!(0.113)! (0.113)!

!Argovie! ?0.0629! ?0.0629! ?!

!(0.0606)! (0.0606)!

!Thurgovie! ?0.0250! ?0.0250! ?!

!(0.0800)! (0.0800)!

!Tessin! 0.0878! 0.0878! ?!

!(0.0980)! (0.0980)!

!Vaud! 0.0974*! 0.0974*! ?!

!(0.0576)! (0.0576)!

!Valais! 0.0787! 0.0787! ?!

!(0.0863)! (0.0863)!

!Neuchatel! 0.103! 0.103! ?!

!(0.0635)! (0.0635)!

!!! !

! 47!

Appendix*3D:*Males*Aged*15*to*19**

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! ?0.00737! 0.00648! ?0.00909!

!(0.0329)! (0.0325)! (0.0461)!

Age! 1.342***! 1.278***! 1.227***!

!(0.303)! (0.260)! (0.283)!

Age!Squared! ?0.0402***! ?0.0382***! ?0.0364***!

!(0.00897)! (0.00772)! (0.00845)!

Berne! ?0.0866! ?0.0545! ?!

!(0.0534)! (0.0610)!

!Lucerne! ?0.0772! ?0.0622! ?!

!(0.0643)! (0.0743)!

!Uri! 0.0311! 0.0563! ?!

!(0.105)! (0.125)!

!Schwytz! 0.0431! 0.0214! ?!

!(0.136)! (0.157)!

!Obwald! ?0.189! ?0.160! ?!

!(0.157)! (0.197)!

!Zoug! ?0.190**! ?0.159! ?!

!(0.0936)! (0.114)!

!Fribourg! 0.0673! 0.0625! ?!

!(0.0957)! (0.109)!

!Soleure! ?0.0770! ?0.0125! ?!

!(0.123)! (0.144)!

!B?Leville! ?0.161! ?0.135! ?!

!(0.136)! (0.163)!

!B?Campagne! ?0.110! ?0.113! ?!

!(0.0870)! (0.0994)!

!Schaffhouse! 0.0267! 0.0451! ?!

!(0.0967)! (0.116)!

!Appenzelle! ?0.161! ?0.148! ?!

!(0.172)! (0.204)!

!Saintgall! ?0.0668! ?0.0552! ?!

!(0.0617)! (0.0726)!

!Grisons! ?0.0224! ?0.0262! ?!

!(0.0736)! (0.0862)!

!Argovie! ?0.0383! ?0.0385! ?!

!(0.0560)! (0.0646)!

!Thurgovie! 0.0474! 0.0434! ?!

!(0.0964)! (0.116)!

!Tessin! 0.364***! 0.329***! ?!

!(0.0940)! (0.114)!

!Vaud! 0.209***! 0.202***! ?!

!(0.0635)! (0.0765)!

!

! 48!

Valais! ?0.00842! 0.00789! ?!

!(0.0833)! (0.0929)!

!Neuchatel! ?0.0592! ?0.0604! ?!

!(0.0817)! (0.0916)!

!No.!of!Siblings! 0.0337! 0.0243! ?!

!(0.0264)! (0.0317)!

!Siblings!Left!Household! ?0.0422! ?0.0319! ?!

!(0.0446)! (0.0513)!

!Brothers!Left!Household! 0.00375! ?0.0178! ?!

!(0.0537)! (0.0619)!

!No.!of!Brothers! 0.0511! 0.0542! ?!

!(0.0378)! (0.0454)!

!Constant! ?11.08***! ?10.57***! ?10.07***!

!(2.541)! (2.177)! (2.367)!

Observations! 685! 685! 685!R?squared! 0.130! 0.130! 0.058!

No.!of!Individuals! ?! 279! 279!*!Appendix*3E:*Canton*Dummies,*Family*Incomes*for*Females*Aged*20*and*Above**

!The!Lower/Middle!Class! The!Upper!Class!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

Berne! ?0.0598! ?!

!(0.107)!

!B?Leville! ?0.00139! ?!

!(0.0913)!

!B?Campagne! 0.0256! ?!

!(0.115)!

!Saintgall! ?0.00340! ?!

!(0.0661)!

!Grisons! 1.055***! ?!

!(0.0832)!

!Argovie! ?0.00258! ?!

!(0.0665)!

!Vaud! ?0.0658! ?!

!(0.128)!

!Valais! ?0.0717! ?!

!(0.137)!

!Neuchatel! ?0.0127! ?!

!(0.141)!

!Schwytz! ?! ?0.0103!

! !(0.0575)!

Fribourg! ?! 0.00777!

! !(0.0583)!

*

! 49!

*Appendix*3F:*Canton*Dummies,*Family*Incomes*for*Males*Aged*20*and*Above**

!The!Lower/Middle!Class! The!Upper!Class!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

Lucerne! ?0.00386! ?!

!(0.0709)!

!Schaffhouse! ?0.0428! ?!

!(0.0594)!

!Argovie! ?0.00106! ?!

!(0.0703)!

!Tessin! ?0.0188! ?!

!(0.0706)!

!**Appendix*3G:*Canton*Dummies,*Emotional*Support*for*Females*Aged*18*and*Above*in*Low/Middle*Income*Families**

!

Decrease!in!Emotional!Support!

No!Change/Increase!in!Emotional!Support!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

Berne! ?! 0.106!

! !(0.255)!

Bleville! ?0.0108! 0.0631!

!(0.197)! (0.165)!

Appenzelle! ?! ?0.0679!

! !(0.206)!

Saintgall! ?! 0.0463!

! !(0.156)!

Grisons! ?! 0.826***!

! !(0.170)!

Argovie! ?! ?0.0163!

! !(0.165)!

Thurgovie! ?! 0.0436!

! !(0.242)!

Vaud! ?! ?0.0465!

! !(0.120)!

Neuchatel! ?! ?0.173!

! !(0.190)!

*** *

! 50!

Appendix*3H:*Emotional*Support*for*Females*Aged*18*and*Above*in*High*Income*Families**

!

Decrease!in!Emotional!Support!

No!Change/Increase!in!Emotional!Support!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.0258! 0.112!

!(0.0773)! (0.0756)!

Age! ?0.157! ?0.426**!

!(0.168)! (0.201)!

Age!Squared! 0.00325! 0.00905*!

!(0.00394)! (0.0046)!

Berne! ?0.00475! ?!

!(0.248)!

!Fribourg! ?0.0108! ?!

!(0.273)!

!Schwytz! ?! ?0.256!

! !(0.2)!

Constant! 1.85! 4.743**!

!(1.696)! (2.072)!

Observations! 203! 107!R?squared! 0.094! 0.253!

No.!of!individuals! 109! 78!** *

! 51!

Appendix*3I:*Emotional*Support*for*Males*Aged*18*and*Above*in*Low/Middle*Income*Families**

!

Decrease!in!Emotional!Support!

No!Change/Increase!in!Emotional!Support!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

No.!of!Siblings!Conscripted! 0.101! ?0.0392!

!(0.332)! (0.0343)!

Age! ?0.230! ?0.136*!

!(0.314)! (0.0749)!

Age!Squared! 0.00445! 0.00268*!

!(0.00647)! (0.00160)!

Lucerne! ?! 0.0872!

! !(0.145)!

Argovie! ?! ?0.0475!

! !(0.163)!

Tessin! ?! ?0.0348!

! !(0.142)!

Saintgall! ?! 0.183!

! !(0.344)!

Constant! 2.788! 1.731**!

!(3.680)! (0.860)!

Observations! 75! 240!R?squared! 0.056! 0.091!

Number!of!idpers! 60! 129!*** *

! 52!

Appendix*4A:*Canton*Dummies,*Females*Aged*20*and*Above*in*Different*Households**

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Berne! 0.0100! 0.0100! ?0.00761!

!(0.0145)! (0.0145)! (0.0952)!

Lucerne! 0.00404! 0.00404! 0.325***!

!(0.0168)! (0.0168)! (0.0946)!

Schwytz! 0.0180! 0.0180! ?0.0157!

!(0.0189)! (0.0189)! (0.111)!

Obwald! 0.0115! 0.0115! ?!

!(0.0571)! (0.0571)!

!Nidwald! 0.0229! 0.0229! ?!

!(0.0425)! (0.0425)!

!Zoug! 0.0111! 0.0111! ?!

!(0.0280)! (0.0280)!

!Fribourg! 0.0211! 0.0211! ?!

!(0.0217)! (0.0217)!

!Soleure! 0.0131! 0.0131! ?!

!(0.0301)! (0.0301)!

!B?Leville! 0.0207! 0.0207! ?0.000173!

!(0.0371)! (0.0371)! (0.0801)!

B?Campagne! 0.00610! 0.00610! ?!

!(0.0225)! (0.0225)!

!Appenzelle! ?0.0173! ?0.0173! ?!

!(0.0257)! (0.0257)!

!Saintgall! 0.00208! 0.00208! 0.0101!

!(0.0169)! (0.0169)! (0.0731)!

Grisons! 0.141***! 0.141***! 0.331***!

!(0.0283)! (0.0283)! (0.0792)!

Argovie! 0.0168! 0.0168! ?!

!(0.0151)! (0.0151)!

!Thurgovie! 0.00333! 0.00333! 0.0222!

!(0.0275)! (0.0275)! (0.102)!

Tessin! 0.0182! 0.0182! ?!

!(0.0213)! (0.0213)!

!Vaud! 0.00875! 0.00875! ?0.0287!

!(0.0154)! (0.0154)! (0.122)!

Valais! 0.0151! 0.0151! ?0.0120!

!(0.0208)! (0.0208)! (0.137)!

Neuchatel! 0.00822! 0.00822! ?0.00618!

!(0.0154)! (0.0154)! (0.0514)!

** *

! 53!

Appendix*4B:*Canton*Dummies,*Individual*V.S.*Household*Fixed*Effects*for*Individuals*Aged*20*and*Above**!

!Females! Males!

!Ind.!FE! HH!FE! Ind.!FE! HH!FE!

Dependant!Variable! (1)! (2)! (3)! (4)!Berne! ?0.0533! ?0.0118! ?! 0.0142!

!(0.139)! (0.114)!

!(0.0992)!

Lucerne! 0.350***! 0.347***! 0.00240! ?0.00187!

!(0.106)! (0.103)! (0.0357)! (0.141)!

Uri! ?! ?! ?! 0.00356!

! ! ! !(0.121)!

Schwytz! ?0.0641! ?0.0161! ?! ?0.00293!

!(0.154)! (0.128)!

!(0.159)!

Obwald! ?! ?0.00212! ?! ?0.00341!

! !(0.248)!

!(0.147)!

Zoug! ?! ?0.00875! ?! 0.0107!

! !(0.248)!

!(0.259)!

Fribourg! ?0.0413! ?0.00299! ?! 0.00396!

!(0.191)! (0.173)!

!(0.0901)!

Soleure! ?! ?0.0170! ?! 0.00932!

! !(0.164)!

!(0.106)!

B?Leville! ?0.0164! ?0.0121! ?! ?0.00403!

!(0.120)! (0.116)!

!(0.133)!

B?Campagne! ?0.00249! ?0.00180! ?! 0.0118!

!(0.151)! (0.147)!

!(0.0796)!

Schaffhouse! ?! ?! ?0.0138! ?0.0128!

! ! !(0.0557)! (0.0730)!

Appenzelle! ?! 0.0220! ?! 0.00734!

! !(0.240)!

!(0.125)!

Appenzelli! ?! ?! ?! 0.00997!

! ! ! !(0.139)!

Saintgall! 0.00402! 0.00471! 0.00506! 0.00978!

!(0.0825)! (0.0801)! (0.0505)! (0.0662)!

Grisons! 0.360***! 0.353***! ?! 1.25e?05!

!(0.0885)! (0.0859)!

!(0.105)!

Argovie! ?0.0167! ?0.0120! ?0.00425! ?0.00795!

!(0.0870)! (0.0846)! (0.0674)! (0.0884)!

Thurgovie! 0.0179! 0.0113! ?! ?0.0158!

!(0.117)! (0.111)!

!(0.138)!

Tessin! ?! ?0.0172! ?0.00744! ?0.00848!

! !(0.248)! (0.0480)! (0.0573)!

Vaud! ?0.0764! ?0.0279! ?! ?0.00331!

!(0.165)! (0.143)!

!(0.0894)!

Valais! ?0.0684! ?0.0200! ?! 1.25e?05!

!(0.171)! (0.150)!

!(0.105)!

Neuchatel! ?0.0511! ?0.00903! ?! ?0.00741!

!(0.183)! (0.164)!

!(0.168)!

! 54!

Appendix*4C:*Canton*Dummies,*Females*Aged*18*and*Above,*1999*Households***

!OLS! RE! FE!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)! (3)!

Berne! 0.0545! 0.0414! ?0.0632!!! (0.0433)! (0.0524)! (0.220)!

Lucerne! 0.0600*! 0.0732*! 0.350**!!! (0.0337)! (0.0421)! (0.142)!

Schwytz! ?0.0539! ?0.0403! ?!!! (0.0618)! (0.0740)!

!Obwald! ?0.0823! ?0.0746! ?!!! (0.0708)! (0.0903)!

!Nidwald! 0.0912*! 0.0664! ?!!! (0.0533)! (0.0811)!

!Zoug! 0.0708! 0.0592! ?!!! (0.0730)! (0.0927)!

!Fribourg! 0.0625! 0.0480! 0.0244!!! (0.0389)! (0.0498)! (0.154)!

Soleure! 0.0258! 0.0167! ?!!! (0.0342)! (0.0454)!

!B?Leville! 0.00679! 0.0113! ?0.0168!!! (0.0423)! (0.0539)! (0.123)!

B?Campagne! 0.0713! 0.0603! ?!!! (0.0436)! (0.0555)!

!Appenzelle! 0.00985! 0.0130! ?!!! (0.0531)! (0.0672)!

!Saintgall! ?0.0286! ?0.0299! 0.0113!!! (0.0408)! (0.0509)! (0.113)!

Grisons! 0.0581! 0.118*! 0.364***!!! (0.0576)! (0.0612)! (0.118)!

Argovie! 0.0651**! 0.0492! ?0.0165!!! (0.0318)! (0.0386)! (0.165)!

Thurgovie! 0.0699*! 0.0640! ?!!! (0.0414)! (0.0546)!

!Tessin! 0.380***! 0.379***! ?!!! (0.0427)! (0.0526)!

!Vaud! 0.0653**! 0.0486! ?0.0184!!! (0.0327)! (0.0393)! (0.0680)!

Valais! 0.0850**! 0.0621! ?!!! (0.0396)! (0.0480)!

!Neuchatel! 0.0509! 0.0406! 0.0111!!! (0.0355)! (0.0419)! (0.128)!

** *

! 55!

Appendix*4D:*Canton*Dummies,*Individuals*Aged*18*and*Above,*by*Primary*Language*!

!Italian! French/German!

Dependant!Variable!(Dropout=1)! (1)! (2)!

Berne! ?! 0.0191!

! !(0.204)!

B?Leville! ?! ?0.0292!

! !(0.175)!

B?Campagne! ?! ?0.0495!

! !(0.223)!

Appenzelle! ?! ?0.0149!

! !(0.167)!

Saintgall! ?! 0.0237!

! !(0.124)!

Grisons! ?! 0.942***!

! !(0.139)!

Argovie! ?! ?0.0234!

! !(0.126)!

Thurgovie! ?! 0.0231!

! !(0.176)!

Vaud! ?! 0.0169!

! !(0.244)!

Valais! ?! 0.0391!

! !(0.262)!

Neuchatel! ?! ?0.0236!

! !(0.272)!

Fribourg! 0.00567! ?!

!(0.360)!

!! !

! 56!

!References!

!

Albrecht,! J.!W.,! P.?A.! Edin,! et! al.! (1999).! "Career! Interruptions! and! Subsequent!Earnings:! A!Reexamination!Using! Swedish!Data."! The! Journal! of!Human!Resources!34(2):!294?311.!

Angrist,! J.! D.! and! S.! H.! Chen! (2011).! "Schooling! and! the! Vietnam?Era! GI! Bill:!Evidence! from! the! Draft! Lottery."! American! Economic! Journal:! Applied!Economics!3(2):!96?118.!

Angrist,!J.!D.!and!A.!B.!Krueger!(1992).!"Estimating!the!Payoff!to!Schooling!Using!the! Vietnam?Era! Draft! Lottery."! National! Bureau! of! Economic! Research!Working!Paper!Series!No.!4067.!

Angrist,! J.! D.! and! A.! B.! Krueger! (1995).! "Split?Sample! Instrumental! Variables!Estimates! of! the! Return! to! Schooling."! Journal! of! Business! &! Economic!Statistics!13(2):!225?235.!

Bauer,! T.! K.,! S.! Bender,! et! al.! (2012).! "Evaluating! the! labor?market! effects! of!compulsory!military!service."!European!Economic!Review(Forthcoming):!1?16.!

Bedard,!K.!and!O.!Deschenes!(2006).!"The!Long?Term!Impact!of!Military!Service!on! Health:! Evidence! from! World! War! II! and! Korean! War! Veterans."!American!Economic!Review!96(1):!176?194.!

Behrman,! J.! R.! and! P.! Taubman! (1989).! "Is! Schooling! "Mostly! in! the! Genes"?!Nature?Nurture! Decomposition! Using! Data! on! Relatives."! Journal! of!Political!Economy!97(6):!1425?1446.!

Björklund,!A.!and!M.!Jäntti!(1997).!"Intergenerational!Income!Mobility!in!Sweden!Compared! to! the!United!States."!The!American!Economic!Review!87(5):!1009?1018.!

Black,! S.! E.,! P.! J.! Devereux,! et! al.! (2005).! "The!More! the!Merrier?! The! Effect! of!Family! Composition! on! Children's! Education."! The! Quarterly! Journal! of!Economics!120(2):!669?700.!

Bommier,! A.! and! S.! Lambert! (2004).! "Human! capital! investments! and! family!composition."!Applied!Economics!Letters!11(3):!193?196.!

Buonanno,!P.! (2007).! "Long?term!effects!of! conscription:! lessons! from! the!UK."!University!of!California,!Berkeley!and!University!of!Bergamo,!Mimeo.!

Butcher,! K.! F.! and! A.! Case! (1994).! "The! Effect! of! Sibling! Sex! Composition! on!Women's! Education! and! Earnings."! The!Quarterly! Journal! of! Economics!109(3):!531?563.!

Card,! D.! and! A.! R.! Cardoso! (2011).! "Can! Compulsory! Military! Service! Raise!Civilian! Wages?! Evidence! from! the! Peacetime! Draft! in! Portugal."!American!Economic!Journal:!Applied!Economics(Forthcoming).!

Card,! D.! and! T.! Lemieux! (2001).! "Going! to! College! to! Avoid! the! Draft:! The!Unintended!Legacy!of!the!Vietnam!War."!The!American!Economic!Review!91(2):!97?102.!

Cipollone,!P.!and!A.!Rosolia!(2007).!"Social!Interactions!in!High!School:!Lessons!from!an!Earthquake."!The!American!Economic!Review!97(3):!948–965.!

Di!Pietro,!G.!(2009).!"Changes!in!the!Extent!of!Inequality!in!Access!to!University!Education!in!Italy."!Rivista!di!Politica!Economica!98(1):!175?213.!

! 57!

Duncan,!G.! J.,! J.!Boisjoly,! et!al.! (2001).! "Sibling,!Peer,!Neighbor,! and!Schoolmate!Correlations! as! Indicators! of! the! Importance! of! Context! for! Adolescent!Development."!Demography!38(3):!437?447.!

Fletcher,!J.,!M.!M.!Seltzer,!et!al.!(2012).!"A!Sibling!Death!in!the!Family:!Common!and!Concequential."!Demography(Forthcoming):!1?47.!

Galiani,!S.,!M.!A.!Rossi,!et!al.!(2011).!"Conscription!and!Crime:!Evidence!from!the!Argentine!Draft!Lottery."!American!Economic!Journal:!Applied!Economics!3(2):!119?136.!

Garg,! A.! and! J.!Morduch! (1998).! "Sibling! rivalry! and! the! gender! gap:! Evidence!from! child! health! outcomes! in!Ghana."! Journal! of! Population!Economics!11(4):!471?493.!

Giuliano,! P.! (2007).! "Living! Arrangements! in! Western! Europe:! Does! Cultural!Origin!Matter?"!Journal!of!the!European!Economic!Association!5(5):!927?952.!

Grenet,! J.,! R.!A.!Hart,! et! al.! (2011).! "Above! and!beyond! the! call.! Long?term! real!earnings! effects! of! British! male! military! conscription! in! the! post?war!years."!Labour!Economics!18(2):!194?204.!

Hauser,!R.!M.!and!H.?H.!D.!Kuo!(1998).!"Does!the!Gender!Composition!of!Sibships!Affect! Women's! Educational! Attainment?"! The! Journal! of! Human!Resources!33(3):!644?657.!

Hole,! A.! R.! (2006).! "Calculating! Murphy?Topel! variance! estimates! in! Stata:! A!simplified!procedure."!Stata!Journal!6(4):!521?529.!

Imbens,!G.!and!W.!van!der!Klaauw!(1995).!"Evaluating!the!Cost!of!Conscription!in!the!Netherlands."! Journal! of!Business!&!Economic! Statistics!13(2):! 207?215.!

Inoue,!A.!and!G.!Solon!(2010).!"Two?Sample!Instrumental!Variables!Estimators."!Review!of!Economics!and!Statistics!92(3):!557?561.!

Kaestner,! R.! (1996).! "Are! Brothers! Really! Better?! Sibling! Sex! Composition! and!Educational! Achievement! Revisited."! National! Bureau! of! Economic!Research!Working!Paper!Series!No.!5521.!

Kaestner,! R.! (1997).! "Are! brothers! really! better?! Sibling! sex! composition! and!educational! achievement! revisited."! The! Journal! of! Human! Resources!32(2):!250?284.!

Keller,! K.,! P.! Poutvaara,! et! al.! (2010).! "Does! a! Military! Draft! Discourage!Enrollment! in!Higher!Education?"!FinanzArchiv:!Public!Finance!Analysis!66(2):!97?120.!

Maurin,! E.! and!T.! Xenogiani! (2007).! "Demand! for! Education! and! Labor!Market!Outcomes:! Lessons! from! the! Abolition! of! Compulsory! Conscription! in!France."!The!Journal!of!Human!Resources!42(4):!795?819.!

Morduch,! J.! (2000).! "Sibling!Rivalry! in!Africa."!The!American!Economic!Review!90(2):!405?409.!

Murphy,! K.!M.! and! R.! H.! Topel! (2002).! "Estimation! and! Inference! in! Two?Step!Econometric! Models."! Journal! of! Business! &! Economic! Statistics! 20(1):!88?97.!

North,! R.! J.,! C.! J.! Holahan,! et! al.! (2008).! "Family! Support,! Family! Income,! and!Happiness:!A!10?Year!Perspective."! Journal! of! Family!Psychology!22(3):!475?483.!

! 58!

Paloyo,! A.! R.! (2010).! Compulsory! Military! Service! in! Germany! Revisited,!Rheinisch?Westfälisches! Institut! für! Wirtschaftsforschung,! Ruhr?Universität!Bochum,!Universität!Dortmund,!Universität!Duisburg?Essen.!

Plug,!E.!and!W.!Vijverberg!(2003).!"Schooling,!Family!Background,!and!Adoption:!Is! It!Nature!or! Is! It!Nurture?"! Journal!of!Political!Economy!111(3):!611?641.!

Qureshi,!J.!A.!(2012).!"Additional!Returns!to!Investing!in!Girls’!Education:!Impact!on!Younger!Sibling!Human!Capital."!University!of!Chicago,!Mimeo.!

Reher,! D.! (2005).! Family! Ties! in! Western! Europe.! Strong! Family! and! Low!Fertility:!A!Paradox?!G.!Zuanna!and!G.!Micheli,!Springer!Netherlands.!14:!45?76.!

Stock,!J.!H.!and!M.!W.!Watson!(2003).!Introduction!to!Econometrics.!Boston,!MA,!Addison?Wesley.!

Wight,!R.!G.,!A.!L.!Botticello,!et!al.!(2006).!"Socioeconomic!Context,!Social!Support,!and! Adolescent! Mental! Health:! A! Multilevel! Investigation."! Journal! of!Youth!and!Adolescence!35(1):!109?120.!

!!