Efficient Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models: Alternative Assumptions and Simplified Estimation
|
|
- Ralph Melton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Efficient Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models: Alternative Assumptions and Simplified Estimation Seung C. Ahn Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85187, USA Peter Schmidt * Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824, USA Abstract This paper considers the estimation of dynamic models for panel data. It shows how to count and express the moment conditions implied by a variety of covariance restrictions. These conditions can be imposed in a GMM framework. Many of the moment conditions are nonlinear in the parameters. We derive a simple linearized estimator that is asymptotically as efficient as the nonlinear GMM estimator, and convenient tests of the validity of the nonlinear restrictions. Key Words: Panel data; Dynamic models; Stationarity; GMM estimation; Conditional moment tests JEL Classification: C23 August, 1993 Revised July, 1994 Revised July, 1995 * Corresponding author, Department of Economics, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824, USA. Phone: (517) ; FAX: (517)
2 References Ahn, S.C., 1990, Three essays on share contracts, labor supply, and the estimation of models for dynamic panel data, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation (Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI). Ahn, S.C., 1995, Model specification testing based on root-t consistent estimators, Unpublished manuscript (Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ). Ahn, S.C. and P. Schmidt, 1995a, A separability result for GMM estimation, with applications to GLS prediction and conditional moment tests, Econometric Reviews 14, Ahn, S.C. and P. Schmidt, 1995b, Efficient estimation of models for dynamic panel data, Journal of Econometrics 68, Anderson, T.W. and C. Hsiao, 1981, Estimation of dynamic models with error components, Journal of the American Statistical Association 76, Arellano, M. and S. Bond, 1991, Tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations, Review of Economic Studies 58, Arellano, M. and O. Bover, 1990, Another look at the instrumental variables estimation of error-component Models, Unpublished manuscript (London School of Economics, London). Arellano, M. and O. Bover, 1995, Another look at the instrumental variables estimation of error-component models, Journal of Econometrics 68, Blundell, R. and S. Bond, 1994, The role of initial conditions in GMM and ML estimators for dynamic panel data models, Unpublished manuscript (University College, London). Breusch, T.S., G.E. Mizon and P. Schmidt, 1989, Efficient estimation using panel data, Econometrica 57,
3 Holtz-Eakin, D., 1988, Testing for individual effects in autoregressive models, Journal of Econometrics 39, Holtz-Eakin, D., W. Newey and H.S. Rosen, 1988, Estimating vector autoregressions with panel data, Econometrica 56, Hsiao, C., 1986, Analysis of panel data (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY). Newey, W., 1985, Generalized method of moments specification testing, Journal of Econometrics 29, Schmidt, P., S.C. Ahn and D. Wyhowski, 1992, Comment, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 10, Wooldridge, J.M., 1995, Estimating systems of equations with different instruments for different equations, Journal of Econometrics, forthcoming.
4 1. INTRODUCTION * A standard approach to the estimation of the dynamic panel data regression model [e.g., Anderson and Hsiao (1981), Hsiao (1986), Holtz-Eakin (1988), Holtz-Eakin, Newey and Rosen (1988), Arellano and Bond (1991)] is to first difference the equation, and then use instrumental variables (IV). More recent papers [Ahn and Schmidt (1995b), Arellano and Bover (1990, 1995)] have shown that, under certain assumptions, there are additional moment conditions that are not exploited by these IV estimators, and have suggested that the additional moment conditions be imposed in a generalized method of moments (GMM) framework. In this paper, we extend these analyses in three ways. First, we count and express the moment conditions available under alternative sets of assumptions about initial conditions and the errors. Second, we propose a linearized GMM estimator, starting from an initial consistent estimator such as a linear estimator based on a subset of the moment conditions, and we derive simple moment tests of the nonlinear moment conditions. Third, for the case that only linear moment conditions are used, we investigate the circumstances under which the optimal GMM estimator is equivalent to a linear IV estimator. These circumstances are quite restrictive, and go beyond uncorrelatedness and homoskedasticity of the errors. The plan of the paper is as follows. Section 2 shows how to count and express the moment conditions available under alternative sets of assumptions. Section 3 considers some * The first author gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the College of Business, Arizona State University. The second author gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the National Science Foundation. Both authors are grateful for the helpful comments of the editor and two referees.
5 2 implications of the assumption of stationarity. Section 4 discusses linearized estimation and conditional moment tests. Finally, Section 5 contains some concluding remarks. 2. Moment Conditions under Alternative Assumptions In this section, we count and express the moment conditions implied by various sets of assumptions. We consider the simple dynamic panel data model: (1) Herei = 1,..., N denotes cross sectional unit (individual) and t = 1,..., T denotes time. Throughout the paper, we consider the case that N is large and T is small, so that asymptotics will be derived under the assumption that N with T fixed. We can also write the T observations on (1) for person i as (2) where y i =(y i1,...,y it ) and y i,-1 and u i are defined similarly. See Ahn and Schmidt (1995b) for more detail on the notation. This model does not contain any additional regressors beyond the lagged dependent variable, but this is only an expository point. The moment conditions implied by exogeneity assumptions on additional regressors have been identified by Schmidt, Ahn and Wyhowski (1992), Ahn and Schmidt (1995b) and Arellano and Bover (1995); they can just be added to the sets of moment conditions identified in this section. We assume independence of all variables across individuals. We will consider various subsets of the following assumptions.
6 3 For all i, ε it is uncorrelated with y i0 for all t. For all i, ε it is uncorrelated with α i for all t. For all i, the ε it are mutually uncorrelated. For all i, var(ε it ) is the same for all t. (A.1) (A.2) (A.3) (A.4) Given the four assumptions (A.1)-(A.4), there are 16 possible cases corresponding to imposing or not imposing each of them. One is the degenerate case of no assumptions. Furthermore, although we have deliberately avoided assumptions about the generation of y i0,it is reasonable to view it as being a linear function of α i and of ε i0, ε i,-1,.... Therefore we will not impose (A.1) (uncorrelatedness of y i0 and ε it, t=1,...,t) unless we also impose both (A.2) (uncorrelatedness of α i and the ε it ) and (A.3) (mutual uncorrelatedness of the ε it ). This leaves nine subsets of assumptions to consider. We begin with the case in which we assume all of (A.1)-(A.4). We will call this CASE A, and it is the only case that we will consider in detail. The method by which the moment conditions implied by (A.1)-(A.4) are identified is as follows. Let Σ be the covariance matrix of the things we make assumptions about, namely (ε i1,...,ε it,y i0,α i ); see Ahn and Schmidt (1995b, equation (6)). Let Λ be the covariance matrix of the "observables" that can be written in terms of data and parameters, namely (u 1i,...,u it,y i0 ); see Ahn and Schmidt (1995b, equation (7)). Assumptions (A.1)-(A.4) impose restrictions on Σ and imply restrictions on Λ. For example, under (A.1)-(A.4), we have σ αt cov(ε it,α i ) = 0 for all t, σ 0t cov(y i0,ε it )=0 for all t, σ ts cov(ε it,ε is ) = 0 for all t s, and σ tt ( var(ε it )) the same ( σ εε ) for all t. This implies three types of restrictions on Λ. First, λ 0t cov(y i0,u it ) is the same for t = 1,...,T. Second, λ tt var(u it ) is the same for t = 1,...,T. Third, λ ts cov(u it,u is ) is the same for t,s =
7 4 1,...,T, t s. The total number of restrictions is (T-1) + (T-1) + [T(T-1)/2-1] = T(T-1)/2 + 2T - 3. The number of restrictions may also be obtained simply by noting that the (T+1)(T+2)/2 distinct elements of Λ depend on the four parameters σ αα ( var(α i )), σ 0α ( cov(y i0,α i )), σ 00 ( var(y i0 )) and σ εε. These restrictions correspond to the moment conditions: (3A) (3B) (3C) Tedious but straightforward algebra shows that the conditions (3A)-(3C) are equivalent to (4A) (4B) (4C) where ū i =T -1 Σ t u it. The T(T-1)/2 moment conditions in (4A) can be motivated by first- differencing (1) to get (5) Holtz-Eakin (1988), Holtz-Eakin, Newey and Rosen (1988) and Arellano and Bond (1991) have noted that the set of available instruments for (5) is [y i0,...,y i,t-2 ], and the moment conditions (4A) express the validity of these instruments. Given assumptions (A.1)-(A.4), Ahn and Schmidt (1995b) show that conditions in (4B) can be replaced by which are linear in δ.
8 5 (6) We now consider the moment conditions that arise under various subsets of (A.1)-(A.4), as discussed above. CASE B. In this case we impose (A.1), (A.2) and (A.3); that is, we impose all of the assumptions except that we do not assume homoskedasticity of the ε it. This is the set of assumptions that was identified as the "standard assumptions" (SA) in Ahn and Schmidt (1995b). We have the T-1 restrictions that λ 0t is the same for all t, and the T(T-1)/2-1 restrictions that λ ts is the same for all t s, just as we did in CASE A. These restrictions can be expressed as the linear moment conditions in (4A), plus the T-2 quadratic moment conditions in (4B). CASE C. In this case we impose (A.2), (A.3), and (A.4). That is, we impose all assumptions except that we do not assume that y i0 is uncorrelated with the ε it. This may be arguably a poorly motivated case; however, it has been discussed in the literature as a "fixed effects" treatment for the initial condition y i0, since it is allowed to be correlated with both α i and the ε it. The parameters σ 0α and the σ 0t are not separately identified. The elements of Λ depend on the T+3 identified parameters σ αα, σ 00, σ εε,(σ 0α +σ 01 ),..., (σ 0α +σ 0T ), so that the number of restrictions is (T+1)(T+2)/2 - (T+3) = T(T-1)/2 + T-2. Wehave the T-1 restrictions that λ tt is the same for all t, and the T(T-1)/2-1 restrictions that λ ts is the same for all t s, just as we did in CASE A. These correspond to the moment conditions in (3B) and (3C). CASE D. In this case we impose (A.2) and (A.3). Thus we assume that the ε it are mutually uncorrelated and uncorrelated with α i. The elements of Λ depend on the 2T + 2
9 6 identified parameters σ αα, σ 00,(σ 0α +σ 01 ),..., (σ 0α +σ 0T ), σ 11,..., σ TT, and the total number of moment conditions is T(T-1)/2-1. Specifically, λ ts is the same for all t s, just as in CASE A or CASE C. These restrictions correspond to the moment conditions given in equation (3C) above. CASE E. In this case we impose (A.2) and (A.4). Thus we assume only that the ε it are homoskedastic and that they are uncorrelated with α i. This may be plausible if the ε it are autocorrelated. In this case Λ depends on the T(T-1)/2 +T+2identified parameters σ 00, (σ αα +σ εε ), (σ 0α +σ 01 ),..., (σ 0α +σ 0T ) and (σ αα +σ st ), s t. We have only the T-1 restrictions that λ tt is the same for all t. They can be expressed as in equation (3B) above. CASE F. In this case we impose only (A.3) and (A.4); that is, we assume that the ε it are homoskedastic and mutually uncorrelated, but we make no assumptions about their relationship to y i0 or α i. The elements of Λ depend on the 2T+2 identified parameters σ 00, σ εε,(σ 0α +σ 01 ),..., (σ 0α +σ 0T ), (σ αα +2σ α1 ),..., (σ αα +2σ αt ). Thus we have T(T-1)/2-1 moment conditions. Specifically, we have the restrictions that λ tt + λ ss -2λ ts is the same for allt,s=1,...,t,t s. These restrictions correspond to the moment conditions that E[(u it - u is ) 2 ] is the same for all t s; that is, (7) There has always been some question in the dynamic model about what constitutes a "fixed effects" treatment. So-called "random effects" treatments of the model have typically imposed stronger assumptions than ours about the generation of y i0, and some treatments have assumed that y i0 is uncorrelated with α i [see, e.g., Hsiao (1986, section 4.3.2)]. The treatments based on the moment conditions (4A) above have sometimes been called fixed-
10 7 effects treatments, even though they clearly depend on assumptions about y i0 and α i, such as lack of correlation of these quantities with the ε it. The case just considered is arguably as close in spirit as we can get to a fixed effects treatment of this model without literally assuming α i and y i0 to be fixed. CASE G. In this case we assume only (A.2), that α i is uncorrelated with the ε it. This implies no moment conditions. CASE H. In this case we assume only (A.3), that the ε it are mutually uncorrelated. For T 4, there are restrictions implied by the fact that the T(T-1)/2 off-diagonal elements of Λ corresponding to covariances of the u it depend only on the T identified parameters (σ αα +2σ α1 ),..., (σ αα +2σ αt ). Thus we have T(T-1)/2 -T=T(T-3)/2 restrictions, of the form λ qr + λ st = λ qs + λ rt for distinct q,r,s,t = 1,...,T. The corresponding moment conditions are (8) CASE I. In this case we assume only (A.4), homoskedasticity of the ε it. This implies no moment conditions. 3. Assumptions about Stationarity In this section, we consider the implications of two different types of stationarity assumptions. We will first consider the following assumption: The series y i0,..., y it is covariance stationary. (S.1) This assumption is made in addition to assumptions (A.1)-(A.4) of the previous section. Arellano and Bover (1990) discuss the following condition: cov(α i,y it ) is the same for t=0,1,..., T. (9)
11 8 This is an assumption of the type made by Breusch, Mizon and Schmidt (1989); it requires equal covariance between the effects and the variables with which they are correlated. Ahn and Schmidt (1995b) show that, given assumptions (A.1)-(A.4), the condition in (9) corresponds to the restriction that (10) and implies one additional moment restriction. Furthermore, they show that it also allows the entire set of available moment conditions to be written linearly; see their equations (12A)- (12B). An alternative, equivalent set of moment conditions for this case is given by Blundell and Bond (1994). To see the connection between (S.1) and (9), we use the solution (11) to calculate (12) where the calculation assumes (A.1)-(A.4). (S1) implies that var(y it )=σ 00 for all t, which occurs if and only if (10) holds and also (13) Thus (S.1) implies (10), which in turn implies (9). However, it also implies the restriction
12 9 (13) on the variance of the initial observation y i0. Imposing (13) as well as (A.1)-(A.4) and (9) yields one additional, nonlinear moment condition: (14) The assumption (S.1) can be compared to the weaker stationarity assumption: Conditional on (α i,y i0 ), (ε i1,..., ε it ) is stationary. (S.2) This assumption implies the following restrictions on the covariance matrix Λ. First, λ tt is the same for t=1,2,..., T. Second, λ 0t is the same for t=1,2,..., T. Third, for j=1,2,..., T-2, λ t,t+j is the same for t=1,2,..., T-j. The total number of moment conditions under (S.2) is (T-1) + (T-1) + (T-2)(T-1)/2 = (T+2)(T-1)/2. The moment conditions can be expressed as in (3A)-(3B) above, plus (15) 4. Estimation and Specification Testing In this section we provide some econometric detail on GMM estimation and specification tests. We provide a simple linearized GMM estimator and convenient moment tests of the validity of the moment conditions. We also discuss the relationship between GMM based on the linear moment conditions and IV estimation. Our discussion will proceed under assumptions (A.1)-(A.4), but can easily be modified to accommodate the other cases Notation and General Results We consider the model (16)
13 10 as given by Ahn and Schmidt (1995b), equation (24). The model may contain time-varying explanatory variables (X) and time-invariant explanatory variables (Z) in addition to the lagged dependent variable. For purposes of GMM it is convenient to focus on the T observations for person i, and we will write (17) to emphasize the dependence of u i on ξ. Exogeneity assumptions on X and Z generate linear moment conditions of the form (18) where R i is a function of the exogenous variables. See Ahn and Schmidt (1995b), equations (33) and (34), for definitions of R i under different exogeneity assumptions. In addition, the moment conditions given by (4A), (6) and (4C) above are valid. The moment conditions in (4A) above are linear in ξ and can be written as E[A i u i (ξ)] = 0, where A i is the T T(T-1)/2 matrix (19) Similarly, the moment conditions in (6) above are also linear in ξ and can be written as E[B 1i u i (ξ)] = 0, where B 1i is the T (T-2) matrix defined by
14 11 (20) However, the moment conditions in (4C) above are quadratic in ξ. We will discuss GMM estimation based on all of the available moment conditions and GMM based on a subset (possibly all) of the linear moment conditions. Suppose that is the total number of moment conditions given in (4A), (6), (4C) and (18). Let S i (T 1 )be made up of columns of R i,a i and B 1i, so that it represents some or all of the available linear instruments. The corresponding linear moment conditions are E[f i (ξ)] = 0, with (21) If the dimension of ξ is k, we assume 1 k so that the conditions f i can identify ξ. The remaining 2 = - 1 moment conditions will be written as E[g i (ξ)] = 0. Since they are at most quadratic, we can write (22) where g 1i,g 2i and g 3i are 2 1, 2 k and 2 k k matrices of functions of data, respectively, and the dimension of the identity matrix is 2. An efficient estimator of ξ can be obtained by GMM based on all of the moment conditions:
15 12 (23) Define m N =N -1 Σ i m i (ξ), with f N,f 1N,f 2N,g N,g 1N,g 2N and g 3N defined similarly; and define M N = m N / ξ =[ f N / ξ, g N / ξ] =[F N,G N ], where G N (ξ) =g 2N + 2(I ξ )g 3N and F N =f 2N. Let M = plim M N, with F and G defined similarly. Define the optimal weighting matrix: (24) Let ˆΩ be a consistent estimate of Ω of the form (25) where ξˆ is an initial consistent estimate of ξ (perhaps based on the linear moment conditions f i, as discussed below); partition it similarly to Ω. In this notation, the efficient GMM estimator ξ GMM minimizes Nm N (ξ) ˆΩ -1 m N (ξ). Using standard results, the asymptotic covariance matrix of N ½ (ξ GMM -ξ) is[m Ω -1 M] -1. We can also test the validity of the moment conditions E[m i (ξ)] = 0 using the usual overidentification test statistic J N =Nm N ( ξ GMM ) Ωˆ -1 m N ( ξ GMM ). This statistic is asymptotically chi-squared with ( -k) degrees of freedom under the joint hypothesis that all the moment conditions are legitimate Linear Moment Conditions and IV Some interesting questions arise when we consider GMM based on the linear moment conditions f i (ξ) only. The optimal GMM estimator based on these conditions is (26)
16 13 This GMM estimator can be compared to the linear IV estimator that is of the same form, but with ˆΩ ff replaced by (Σ i S i S i ). The GMM estimator is generally more efficient than the linear IV estimator. They are asymptotically equivalent in the case that Ω ff is proportional to E(S i S i ), which occurs if E(S i u i u i S i ) is proportional to E(S i S i ). For the case that S i consists only of columns of R i, so that only the moment conditions (18) based on exogeneity of X and Z are imposed, this equivalence will generally hold. Arellano and Bond (1991) considered the moment conditions (4A), so that S i also contains A i, and noted that asymptotic equivalence between the IV and GMM estimates fails if we relax the homoskedasticity assumption (A.4), even though the moment conditions (4A) are still valid under only assumptions (A.1)-(A.3) (our CASE B). In fact, even the full set of assumptions (A.1)-(A.4) is not sufficient to imply the asymptotic equivalence of the IV and GMM estimates when the moment conditions (4A) are used. Assumptions (A.1)-(A.4) deal only with second moments, whereas asymptotic equivalence of IV and GMM involves restrictions on fourth moments (e.g., cov(y 2 i0,ε 2 it ) = 0). Ahn (1990) proved the asymptotic equivalence of the IV and GMM estimators based on the moment conditions (4A) for the case that (A.4) is maintained and (A.1)-(A.3) are strengthened by replacing uncorrelatedness with independence. Wooldridge (1995) provides a more general treatment of cases in which IV and GMM are asymptotically equivalent. In the present case, his results indicate that asymptotic equivalence would hold if we rewrite (A.1)-(A.4) in terms of conditional expectations instead of uncorrelatedness; that is, if we assume (A.5) (A.6)
17 14 A more novel observation is that the asymptotic equivalence of IV and GMM fails whenever we use the additional linear moment conditions (6). This is so even if assumptions (A.1)-(A.4) are strengthened by replacing uncorrelatedness with independence. When uncorrelatedness in (A.1)-(A.3) is replaced by independence, Ahn (1990, Chapter 3, Appendix 3) shows that, while E(A i u i u i A i )=σ εε E(A i A i ) and E(A i u i u i B 1i )=σ εε E(A i B 1i ), (27) where d=e(ε 4 )-3σ εε 2 and C is a square matrix of dimension (T-2) with 2 on the diagonal, -1 one position off the diagonal, and 0 elsewhere. Under normality d=0buttheterm σ εε C remains Linearized GMM and Specification Tests We now consider a linearized GMM estimator. Suppose that ξ is any consistent estimator of ξ; for example, ξ f. Following Newey (1985, p. 238), the linearized GMM estimator is of the form (28) This estimator is consistent and has the same asymptotic distribution as ξ GMM. When the LGMM estimator is based on the initial estimator ξ f, some further simplification is possible. Applying the usual matrix inversion rule to ˆΩ and using the fact that f 2N ˆΩ -1 ff f N ( ξ f ) = 0, we can write the LGMM estimator as follows: (29) Here ˆΓ -1 =[f 2N ˆΩ ff -1 f 2N ] -1 denotes the usual estimate of the asymptotic covariance matrix of
18 N ½ ( ξ f -ξ); ˆΩ bb = ˆΩ gg - ˆΩ gf ˆΩ ff -1 ˆΩ fg ;b N (ξ)=g N (ξ)- ˆΩ gf ˆΩ ff -1 f N (ξ); B N (ξ) = b N / ξ =G N (ξ)- ˆΩ gf ˆΩ ff - 1 f 2N ; and B N and b N are shorthand for B N ( ξ f ) and b N (ξ f), respectively. 15 We now consider alternative tests of the validity of the moment conditions. One can of course use J N to test the joint hypothesis that all the moment conditions are legitimate. We consider an alternative procedure in which we maintain the validity of the moment conditions E[f i (ξ)] = 0 that yield the linear estimate ξ f, and we test the additional moment conditions E[g i (ξ)] = 0. This may be a reasonable empirical strategy because the moment conditions based on f i (ξ) are linear and therefore easy to impose; we can test the validity of the hard-toimpose (nonlinear) restrictions before we impose them. Alternatively, we might choose f i (ξ) to be only the set of moment conditions based on the exogeneity assumptions (18), and we can test the validity of the further moment conditions based on second-moment assumptions on the errors. Following Newey (1985, p. 243), we can construct the test statistic (30) This statistic is asymptotically chi-squared with 2 degrees of freedom under the null hypothesis that the moment conditions based on g i are legitimate. We can also construct a modified overidentification test that is closely related to C N. Letting m N =m N ( ξ f ) and M N =M N ( ξ f ), we define: (31) where J f N =Nf N ( ξ f ) ˆΩ -1 ff f N ( ξ f ) is the statistic for testing E[f i (ξ)] = 0, and the second equality results from the fact that f 2N ˆΩ -1 ff f N ( ξ f ) = 0. Following Ahn (1995), we can show that MJ N and J N are asymptotically identical under the hypothesis that all the moment conditions are valid. In fact, MJ N and J N are asymptotically equivalent under local alternative hypotheses H * = {H T} * T=1 where H T:T * ½ E[m N (ξ)] = O(1). See Ahn (1995, Proposition 1).
19 16 An alternative and perhaps more intuitive approach to the estimation and testing problem is as follows. Define ρ = E[g i (ξ)], an 2 1 vector of auxiliary parameters; we wish to test the hypothesis ρ = 0. Define θ =(ξ,ρ ), and consider the following GMM problem: (32) for which the solution is θ =(ξ, ρ ). This problem satisfies the conditions for the "separability" result of Ahn and Schmidt (1995a) and its solution is simply ξ = ξ f and ρ =b N. By standard GMM results, the asymptotic covariance matrix of N ½ ( θ-θ) is given by Ξ -1 = [(M,J) Ω -1 (M,J)] -1, where J = [0,-I], with and I of dimension 2. It is consistently estimated by (33) which is a standard calculation since Ξ is just the Hessian of the GMM minimand in (32). Following Ahn and Schmidt (1995a), the conventional Wald statistic (based on ρ and Ξ -1 ) for the hypothesis ρ = 0 is numerically identical to C N, provided that the same weighting matrix is used. The statistic MJ N can be then obtained by simply adding this Wald statistic and JN. f Once ξ (= ξ f), ρ (= b N) and Ξ -1 are computed, it is natural to obtain an efficient minimum distance (MD) estimator of ξ. Suppose that ξ MD solves: (34) Then it is straightforward to show that ξ MD = ξ + Ξ 11-1 Ξ 12 ρ, where Ξ 11 =M N (ξ f) ˆΩ -1 M N (ξ f) and Ξ 12 =M N (ξ f) ˆΩ -1 J are submatrices of Ξ. With these substitutions, and substituting ξ = ξ f and ρ =b N =g N ( ξ f )- ˆΩ gf ˆΩ ff -1 f N (ξ f) as given above, we obtain ξ MD = ξ LGMM. Unsurprisingly, there
20 is a close link between linearization of the moment conditions g i (ξ) in estimation and tests of their validity Concluding Remarks In this paper, we have considered the estimation of dynamic models for panel data. We have counted and expressed the moment conditions implied by a wide variety of different assumptions. These conditions can be imposed in a GMM framework. While many of the moment conditions are nonlinear in the parameters, we derive a very simple linearized estimator that is asymptotically as efficient as the nonlinear GMM estimator, and simple moment tests of the validity of the nonlinear restrictions. Some evidence on the efficiency gains from using nonlinear moment conditions is given in Ahn and Schmidt (1995b), for one of the sets of assumptions considered in this paper. These efficiency gains appear to be large enough to justify the effort needed to impose the nonlinear moment conditions. Thus the methods developed in this paper to test and impose these conditions should be of practical use.
EFFICIENT ESTIMATION OF MODELS FOR DYNAMIC PANEL DATA. Seung C. Ahn. Arizona State University. Peter Schmidt. Michigan State University
EFFICIENT ESTIMATION OF MODELS FOR DYNAMIC PANEL DATA Seung C. Ahn Arizona State University Peter Schmidt Michigan State University November, 1989 Revised July, 1990 Revised September, 1990 Revised February,
More informationORTHOGONALITY TESTS IN LINEAR MODELS SEUNG CHAN AHN ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY ABSTRACT
ORTHOGONALITY TESTS IN LINEAR MODELS SEUNG CHAN AHN ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY ABSTRACT This paper considers several tests of orthogonality conditions in linear models where stochastic errors may be heteroskedastic
More informationEstimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models with Sample Selection
=== Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models with Sample Selection Anastasia Semykina* Department of Economics Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306-2180 asemykina@fsu.edu Jeffrey M. Wooldridge
More informationImproving GMM efficiency in dynamic models for panel data with mean stationarity
Working Paper Series Department of Economics University of Verona Improving GMM efficiency in dynamic models for panel data with mean stationarity Giorgio Calzolari, Laura Magazzini WP Number: 12 July
More informationLinear dynamic panel data models
Linear dynamic panel data models Laura Magazzini University of Verona L. Magazzini (UniVR) Dynamic PD 1 / 67 Linear dynamic panel data models Dynamic panel data models Notation & Assumptions One of the
More informationChapter 6. Panel Data. Joan Llull. Quantitative Statistical Methods II Barcelona GSE
Chapter 6. Panel Data Joan Llull Quantitative Statistical Methods II Barcelona GSE Introduction Chapter 6. Panel Data 2 Panel data The term panel data refers to data sets with repeated observations over
More informationEconometrics of Panel Data
Econometrics of Panel Data Jakub Mućk Meeting # 6 Jakub Mućk Econometrics of Panel Data Meeting # 6 1 / 36 Outline 1 The First-Difference (FD) estimator 2 Dynamic panel data models 3 The Anderson and Hsiao
More informationA Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 4: Linear Panel Data Models, II. Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August 2008
A Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 4: Linear Panel Data Models, II Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August 2008 5. Estimating Production Functions Using Proxy Variables 6. Pseudo Panels
More information17/003. Alternative moment conditions and an efficient GMM estimator for dynamic panel data models. January, 2017
17/003 Alternative moment conditions and an efficient GMM estimator for dynamic panel data models Gabriel Montes-Rojas, Walter Sosa-Escudero, and Federico Zincenko January, 2017 Alternative moment conditions
More informationGMM-based inference in the AR(1) panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails
GMM-based inference in the AR() panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails Edith Madsen entre for Applied Microeconometrics (AM) Department of Economics, University of openhagen,
More informationGMM ESTIMATION OF SHORT DYNAMIC PANEL DATA MODELS WITH INTERACTIVE FIXED EFFECTS
J. Japan Statist. Soc. Vol. 42 No. 2 2012 109 123 GMM ESTIMATION OF SHORT DYNAMIC PANEL DATA MODELS WITH INTERACTIVE FIXED EFFECTS Kazuhiko Hayakawa* In this paper, we propose GMM estimators for short
More informationEFFICIENT ESTIMATION USING PANEL DATA 1. INTRODUCTION
Econornetrica, Vol. 57, No. 3 (May, 1989), 695-700 EFFICIENT ESTIMATION USING PANEL DATA BY TREVOR S. BREUSCH, GRAYHAM E. MIZON, AND PETER SCHMIDT' 1. INTRODUCTION IN AN IMPORTANT RECENT PAPER, Hausman
More informationEconomics 536 Lecture 7. Introduction to Specification Testing in Dynamic Econometric Models
University of Illinois Fall 2016 Department of Economics Roger Koenker Economics 536 Lecture 7 Introduction to Specification Testing in Dynamic Econometric Models In this lecture I want to briefly describe
More informationConsistent estimation of dynamic panel data models with time-varying individual effects
ANNALES D ÉCONOMIE ET DE STATISTIQUE. N 70 2003 Consistent estimation of dynamic panel data models with time-varying individual effects Céline NAUGES, Alban THOMAS 1 ABSTRACT. This paper proposes a new
More informationAsymptotic distributions of the quadratic GMM estimator in linear dynamic panel data models
Asymptotic distributions of the quadratic GMM estimator in linear dynamic panel data models By Tue Gørgens Chirok Han Sen Xue ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics # 635 May 2016 JEL: C230 ISBN:
More informationSpecification Test for Instrumental Variables Regression with Many Instruments
Specification Test for Instrumental Variables Regression with Many Instruments Yoonseok Lee and Ryo Okui April 009 Preliminary; comments are welcome Abstract This paper considers specification testing
More information1 Estimation of Persistent Dynamic Panel Data. Motivation
1 Estimation of Persistent Dynamic Panel Data. Motivation Consider the following Dynamic Panel Data (DPD) model y it = y it 1 ρ + x it β + µ i + v it (1.1) with i = {1, 2,..., N} denoting the individual
More informationEconometrics. Week 4. Fall Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague
Econometrics Week 4 Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague Fall 2012 1 / 23 Recommended Reading For the today Serial correlation and heteroskedasticity in
More informationReview of Classical Least Squares. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Review of Classical Least Squares James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley The Classical Linear Model The object of least squares regression methods is to model and estimate
More information1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Econometrics II SYLLABUS Dr. Seung Chan Ahn Sogang University Spring 2003 1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION This course presumes that students have completed Econometrics I or equivalent. This course is designed
More informationChapter 2. Dynamic panel data models
Chapter 2. Dynamic panel data models School of Economics and Management - University of Geneva Christophe Hurlin, Université of Orléans University of Orléans April 2018 C. Hurlin (University of Orléans)
More informationPanel Data Models. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Panel Data Models James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley Overview Like Zellner s seemingly unrelated regression models, the dependent and explanatory variables for panel
More informationMissing dependent variables in panel data models
Missing dependent variables in panel data models Jason Abrevaya Abstract This paper considers estimation of a fixed-effects model in which the dependent variable may be missing. For cross-sectional units
More informationA Course on Advanced Econometrics
A Course on Advanced Econometrics Yongmiao Hong The Ernest S. Liu Professor of Economics & International Studies Cornell University Course Introduction: Modern economies are full of uncertainties and risk.
More informationModified Generalized Instrumental Variables Estimation of Panel Data Models with Strictly Exogenous Instrumental Variables
Modified Generalized Instrumental Variables Estimation of Panel Data Models with Strictly Exogenous Instrumental Variables Seung Chan Ahn Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Peter Schmidt Michigan
More informationTesting Overidentifying Restrictions with Many Instruments and Heteroskedasticity
Testing Overidentifying Restrictions with Many Instruments and Heteroskedasticity John C. Chao, Department of Economics, University of Maryland, chao@econ.umd.edu. Jerry A. Hausman, Department of Economics,
More information1 Introduction The time series properties of economic series (orders of integration and cointegration) are often of considerable interest. In micro pa
Unit Roots and Identification in Autoregressive Panel Data Models: A Comparison of Alternative Tests Stephen Bond Institute for Fiscal Studies and Nuffield College, Oxford Céline Nauges LEERNA-INRA Toulouse
More informationLecture 8 Panel Data
Lecture 8 Panel Data Economics 8379 George Washington University Instructor: Prof. Ben Williams Introduction This lecture will discuss some common panel data methods and problems. Random effects vs. fixed
More informationConsistent OLS Estimation of AR(1) Dynamic Panel Data Models with Short Time Series
Consistent OLS Estimation of AR(1) Dynamic Panel Data Models with Short Time Series Kazuhiko Hayakawa Department of Economics Hitotsubashi University January 19, 006 Abstract In this paper, we examine
More informationAn estimate of the long-run covariance matrix, Ω, is necessary to calculate asymptotic
Chapter 6 ESTIMATION OF THE LONG-RUN COVARIANCE MATRIX An estimate of the long-run covariance matrix, Ω, is necessary to calculate asymptotic standard errors for the OLS and linear IV estimators presented
More informationDynamic Panels. Chapter Introduction Autoregressive Model
Chapter 11 Dynamic Panels This chapter covers the econometrics methods to estimate dynamic panel data models, and presents examples in Stata to illustrate the use of these procedures. The topics in this
More informationFinal Exam. Economics 835: Econometrics. Fall 2010
Final Exam Economics 835: Econometrics Fall 2010 Please answer the question I ask - no more and no less - and remember that the correct answer is often short and simple. 1 Some short questions a) For each
More informationEFFICIENT ESTIMATION OF PANEL DATA MODELS WITH STRICTLY EXOGENOUS EXPLANATORY VARIABLES
EFFICIENT ESTIMATION OF PANEL DATA MODELS WITH STRICTLY EXOGENOUS EXPLANATORY VARIABLES Kyung So Im Department of Economics Wichita State University, Wichita, KS 67260, USA Seung C. Ahn * Department of
More informationAdvanced Econometrics
Based on the textbook by Verbeek: A Guide to Modern Econometrics Robert M. Kunst robert.kunst@univie.ac.at University of Vienna and Institute for Advanced Studies Vienna May 16, 2013 Outline Univariate
More informationIncreasing the Power of Specification Tests. November 18, 2018
Increasing the Power of Specification Tests T W J A. H U A MIT November 18, 2018 A. This paper shows how to increase the power of Hausman s (1978) specification test as well as the difference test in a
More informationNon-linear panel data modeling
Non-linear panel data modeling Laura Magazzini University of Verona laura.magazzini@univr.it http://dse.univr.it/magazzini May 2010 Laura Magazzini (@univr.it) Non-linear panel data modeling May 2010 1
More informationPanel Data Models. Chapter 5. Financial Econometrics. Michael Hauser WS17/18 1 / 63
1 / 63 Panel Data Models Chapter 5 Financial Econometrics Michael Hauser WS17/18 2 / 63 Content Data structures: Times series, cross sectional, panel data, pooled data Static linear panel data models:
More informationECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria
ECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria SOLUTION TO FINAL EXAM Friday, April 12, 2013. From 9:00-12:00 (3 hours) INSTRUCTIONS:
More informationTime Invariant Variables and Panel Data Models : A Generalised Frisch- Waugh Theorem and its Implications
Time Invariant Variables and Panel Data Models : A Generalised Frisch- Waugh Theorem and its Implications Jaya Krishnakumar No 2004.01 Cahiers du département d économétrie Faculté des sciences économiques
More informationØkonomisk Kandidateksamen 2004 (I) Econometrics 2. Rettevejledning
Økonomisk Kandidateksamen 2004 (I) Econometrics 2 Rettevejledning This is a closed-book exam (uden hjælpemidler). Answer all questions! The group of questions 1 to 4 have equal weight. Within each group,
More informationECON3327: Financial Econometrics, Spring 2016
ECON3327: Financial Econometrics, Spring 2016 Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics (5th ed, 2012) Chapter 11: OLS with time series data Stationary and weakly dependent time series The notion of a stationary
More informationEconometrics I KS. Module 2: Multivariate Linear Regression. Alexander Ahammer. This version: April 16, 2018
Econometrics I KS Module 2: Multivariate Linear Regression Alexander Ahammer Department of Economics Johannes Kepler University of Linz This version: April 16, 2018 Alexander Ahammer (JKU) Module 2: Multivariate
More informationComments on: Panel Data Analysis Advantages and Challenges. Manuel Arellano CEMFI, Madrid November 2006
Comments on: Panel Data Analysis Advantages and Challenges Manuel Arellano CEMFI, Madrid November 2006 This paper provides an impressive, yet compact and easily accessible review of the econometric literature
More informationLECTURE 13: TIME SERIES I
1 LECTURE 13: TIME SERIES I AUTOCORRELATION: Consider y = X + u where y is T 1, X is T K, is K 1 and u is T 1. We are using T and not N for sample size to emphasize that this is a time series. The natural
More informationIntermediate Econometrics
Intermediate Econometrics Heteroskedasticity Text: Wooldridge, 8 July 17, 2011 Heteroskedasticity Assumption of homoskedasticity, Var(u i x i1,..., x ik ) = E(u 2 i x i1,..., x ik ) = σ 2. That is, the
More informationDynamic panel data methods
Dynamic panel data methods for cross-section panels Franz Eigner University Vienna Prepared for UK Econometric Methods of Panel Data with Prof. Robert Kunst 27th May 2009 Structure 1 Preliminary considerations
More informationInference about Clustering and Parametric. Assumptions in Covariance Matrix Estimation
Inference about Clustering and Parametric Assumptions in Covariance Matrix Estimation Mikko Packalen y Tony Wirjanto z 26 November 2010 Abstract Selecting an estimator for the variance covariance matrix
More informationEconometrics I. Professor William Greene Stern School of Business Department of Economics 25-1/25. Part 25: Time Series
Econometrics I Professor William Greene Stern School of Business Department of Economics 25-1/25 Econometrics I Part 25 Time Series 25-2/25 Modeling an Economic Time Series Observed y 0, y 1,, y t, What
More informationEconometrics. Week 8. Fall Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague
Econometrics Week 8 Institute of Economic Studies Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague Fall 2012 1 / 25 Recommended Reading For the today Instrumental Variables Estimation and Two Stage
More informationG. S. Maddala Kajal Lahiri. WILEY A John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publication
G. S. Maddala Kajal Lahiri WILEY A John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publication TEMT Foreword Preface to the Fourth Edition xvii xix Part I Introduction and the Linear Regression Model 1 CHAPTER 1 What is Econometrics?
More informationxtdpdqml: Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation of linear dynamic short-t panel data models
xtdpdqml: Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation of linear dynamic short-t panel data models Sebastian Kripfganz University of Exeter Business School, Department of Economics, Exeter, UK UK Stata Users Group
More informationDEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY CHRISTCHURCH, NEW ZEALAND Testing For Unit Roots With Cointegrated Data NOTE: This paper is a revision of
More informationGMM based inference for panel data models
GMM based inference for panel data models Maurice J.G. Bun and Frank Kleibergen y this version: 24 February 2010 JEL-code: C13; C23 Keywords: dynamic panel data model, Generalized Method of Moments, weak
More informationSpecification testing in panel data models estimated by fixed effects with instrumental variables
Specification testing in panel data models estimated by fixed effects wh instrumental variables Carrie Falls Department of Economics Michigan State Universy Abstract I show that a handful of the regressions
More informationApproximate Distributions of the Likelihood Ratio Statistic in a Structural Equation with Many Instruments
CIRJE-F-466 Approximate Distributions of the Likelihood Ratio Statistic in a Structural Equation with Many Instruments Yukitoshi Matsushita CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo February 2007
More informationEconometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data
Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data Jeffrey M. Wooldridge / The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England Contents Preface Acknowledgments xvii xxiii I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
More informationxtseqreg: Sequential (two-stage) estimation of linear panel data models
xtseqreg: Sequential (two-stage) estimation of linear panel data models and some pitfalls in the estimation of dynamic panel models Sebastian Kripfganz University of Exeter Business School, Department
More informationEconometrics. 9) Heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation
30C00200 Econometrics 9) Heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation Timo Kuosmanen Professor, Ph.D. http://nomepre.net/index.php/timokuosmanen Today s topics Heteroscedasticity Possible causes Testing for
More informationFinite Sample Performance of A Minimum Distance Estimator Under Weak Instruments
Finite Sample Performance of A Minimum Distance Estimator Under Weak Instruments Tak Wai Chau February 20, 2014 Abstract This paper investigates the nite sample performance of a minimum distance estimator
More informationEconometrics II - EXAM Outline Solutions All questions have 25pts Answer each question in separate sheets
Econometrics II - EXAM Outline Solutions All questions hae 5pts Answer each question in separate sheets. Consider the two linear simultaneous equations G with two exogeneous ariables K, y γ + y γ + x δ
More informationNEW ESTIMATION METHODS FOR PANEL DATA MODELS. Valentin Verdier
NEW ESTIMATION METHODS FOR PANEL DATA MODELS By Valentin Verdier A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Economics - Doctor of
More informationModified Variance Ratio Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Heteroskedasticity
The Lahore Journal of Economics 23 : 1 (Summer 2018): pp. 1 19 Modified Variance Ratio Test for Autocorrelation in the Presence of Heteroskedasticity Sohail Chand * and Nuzhat Aftab ** Abstract Given that
More informationBias Correction Methods for Dynamic Panel Data Models with Fixed Effects
MPRA Munich Personal RePEc Archive Bias Correction Methods for Dynamic Panel Data Models with Fixed Effects Mohamed R. Abonazel Department of Applied Statistics and Econometrics, Institute of Statistical
More informationIterative Bias Correction Procedures Revisited: A Small Scale Monte Carlo Study
Discussion Paper: 2015/02 Iterative Bias Correction Procedures Revisited: A Small Scale Monte Carlo Study Artūras Juodis www.ase.uva.nl/uva-econometrics Amsterdam School of Economics Roetersstraat 11 1018
More informationLecture 7: Dynamic panel models 2
Lecture 7: Dynamic panel models 2 Ragnar Nymoen Department of Economics, UiO 25 February 2010 Main issues and references The Arellano and Bond method for GMM estimation of dynamic panel data models A stepwise
More informationAsymptotic Properties of Empirical Likelihood Estimator in Dynamic Panel Data Models
Asymptotic Properties of Empirical Likelihood Estimator in Dynamic Panel Data Models Günce Eryürük North Carolina State University February, 2009 Department of Economics, Box 80, North Carolina State University,
More informationNotes on Time Series Modeling
Notes on Time Series Modeling Garey Ramey University of California, San Diego January 17 1 Stationary processes De nition A stochastic process is any set of random variables y t indexed by t T : fy t g
More informationEconomic modelling and forecasting
Economic modelling and forecasting 2-6 February 2015 Bank of England he generalised method of moments Ole Rummel Adviser, CCBS at the Bank of England ole.rummel@bankofengland.co.uk Outline Classical estimation
More information13. Time Series Analysis: Asymptotics Weakly Dependent and Random Walk Process. Strict Exogeneity
Outline: Further Issues in Using OLS with Time Series Data 13. Time Series Analysis: Asymptotics Weakly Dependent and Random Walk Process I. Stationary and Weakly Dependent Time Series III. Highly Persistent
More informationLinear models. Linear models are computationally convenient and remain widely used in. applied econometric research
Linear models Linear models are computationally convenient and remain widely used in applied econometric research Our main focus in these lectures will be on single equation linear models of the form y
More informationThe Size and Power of Four Tests for Detecting Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity in the Presence of Serial Correlation
The Size and Power of Four s for Detecting Conditional Heteroskedasticity in the Presence of Serial Correlation A. Stan Hurn Department of Economics Unversity of Melbourne Australia and A. David McDonald
More informationEfficient Estimation of Non-Linear Dynamic Panel Data Models with Application to Smooth Transition Models
Efficient Estimation of Non-Linear Dynamic Panel Data Models with Application to Smooth Transition Models Tue Gørgens Christopher L. Skeels Allan H. Würtz February 16, 2008 Preliminary and incomplete.
More informationSingle Equation Linear GMM with Serially Correlated Moment Conditions
Single Equation Linear GMM with Serially Correlated Moment Conditions Eric Zivot October 28, 2009 Univariate Time Series Let {y t } be an ergodic-stationary time series with E[y t ]=μ and var(y t )
More informationBootstrapping Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator
Bootstrapping Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator by Emmanuel Flachaire Eurequa, University Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne December 2001 Abstract Recent results of Cribari-Neto and Zarkos
More informationGMM Estimation of Empirical Growth Models
GMM Estimation of Empirical Growth Models Stephen Bond Nuffield College, University of Oxford and Institute for Fiscal Studies Anke Hoeffler St.Antony s College, University of Oxford and Centre for the
More informationA Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 14: Control Functions and Related Methods. Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August 2008
A Course in Applied Econometrics Lecture 14: Control Functions and Related Methods Jeff Wooldridge IRP Lectures, UW Madison, August 2008 1. Linear-in-Parameters Models: IV versus Control Functions 2. Correlated
More informationSubset-Continuous-Updating GMM Estimators for Dynamic Panel Data Models
econometrics Article Subset-Continuous-Updating GMM Estimators for Dynamic Panel Data Models Richard A Ashley 1 and Xiaojin Sun 2, * 1 Department of Economics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24060, USA;
More information1. Overview of the Basic Model
IRP Lectures Madison, WI, August 2008 Lectures 3 & 4, Monday, August 4, 11:15-12:30 and 1:30-2:30 Linear Panel Data Models These notes cover some recent topics in linear panel data models. They begin with
More informationThe Time Series and Cross-Section Asymptotics of Empirical Likelihood Estimator in Dynamic Panel Data Models
The Time Series and Cross-Section Asymptotics of Empirical Likelihood Estimator in Dynamic Panel Data Models Günce Eryürük August 200 Centro de Investigación Económica, Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de
More informationInstrumental Variables and GMM: Estimation and Testing. Steven Stillman, New Zealand Department of Labour
Instrumental Variables and GMM: Estimation and Testing Christopher F Baum, Boston College Mark E. Schaffer, Heriot Watt University Steven Stillman, New Zealand Department of Labour March 2003 Stata Journal,
More informationTime Series Models and Inference. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Time Series Models and Inference James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley Overview In contrast to the classical linear regression model, in which the components of the
More informationBirkbeck Working Papers in Economics & Finance
ISSN 1745-8587 Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics & Finance Department of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics BWPEF 1809 A Note on Specification Testing in Some Structural Regression Models Walter
More informationIntroductory Econometrics
Based on the textbook by Wooldridge: : A Modern Approach Robert M. Kunst robert.kunst@univie.ac.at University of Vienna and Institute for Advanced Studies Vienna November 23, 2013 Outline Introduction
More informationWeek 11 Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation
Week 11 Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation İnsan TUNALI Econ 511 Econometrics I Koç University 27 November 2018 Lecture outline 1. OLS and assumptions on V(ε) 2. Violations of V(ε) σ 2 I: 1. Heteroskedasticity
More informationSimultaneous Equations and Weak Instruments under Conditionally Heteroscedastic Disturbances
Simultaneous Equations and Weak Instruments under Conditionally Heteroscedastic Disturbances E M. I and G D.A. P Michigan State University Cardiff University This version: July 004. Preliminary version
More informationEconomics 620, Lecture 13: Time Series I
Economics 620, Lecture 13: Time Series I Nicholas M. Kiefer Cornell University Professor N. M. Kiefer (Cornell University) Lecture 13: Time Series I 1 / 19 AUTOCORRELATION Consider y = X + u where y is
More information7 Introduction to Time Series Time Series vs. Cross-Sectional Data Detrending Time Series... 15
Econ 495 - Econometric Review 1 Contents 7 Introduction to Time Series 3 7.1 Time Series vs. Cross-Sectional Data............ 3 7.2 Detrending Time Series................... 15 7.3 Types of Stochastic
More informationOn the optimal weighting matrix for the GMM system estimator in dynamic panel data models
Discussion Paper: 007/08 On the optimal weighting matrix for the GMM system estimator in dynamic panel data models Jan F Kiviet wwwfeeuvanl/ke/uva-econometrics Amsterdam School of Economics Department
More informationA Practical Test for Strict Exogeneity in Linear Panel Data Models with Fixed Effects
A Practical Test for Strict Exogeneity in Linear Panel Data Models with Fixed Effects Liangjun Su, Yonghui Zhang,JieWei School of Economics, Singapore Management University School of Economics, Renmin
More informationLinear Panel Data Models
Linear Panel Data Models Michael R. Roberts Department of Finance The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania October 5, 2009 Michael R. Roberts Linear Panel Data Models 1/56 Example First Difference
More informationEC327: Advanced Econometrics, Spring 2007
EC327: Advanced Econometrics, Spring 2007 Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics (3rd ed, 2006) Chapter 14: Advanced panel data methods Fixed effects estimators We discussed the first difference (FD) model
More informationLeast Squares Estimation of a Panel Data Model with Multifactor Error Structure and Endogenous Covariates
Least Squares Estimation of a Panel Data Model with Multifactor Error Structure and Endogenous Covariates Matthew Harding and Carlos Lamarche January 12, 2011 Abstract We propose a method for estimating
More informationNearly Unbiased Estimation in Dynamic Panel Data Models
TI 00-008/ Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper Nearly Unbiased Estimation in Dynamic Panel Data Models Martin A. Carree Department of General Economics, Faculty of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam,
More informationPanel Threshold Regression Models with Endogenous Threshold Variables
Panel Threshold Regression Models with Endogenous Threshold Variables Chien-Ho Wang National Taipei University Eric S. Lin National Tsing Hua University This Version: June 29, 2010 Abstract This paper
More informationHeteroskedasticity. We now consider the implications of relaxing the assumption that the conditional
Heteroskedasticity We now consider the implications of relaxing the assumption that the conditional variance V (u i x i ) = σ 2 is common to all observations i = 1,..., In many applications, we may suspect
More informationEfficiency of repeated-cross-section estimators in fixed-effects models
Efficiency of repeated-cross-section estimators in fixed-effects models Montezuma Dumangane and Nicoletta Rosati CEMAPRE and ISEG-UTL January 2009 Abstract PRELIMINARY AND INCOMPLETE Exploiting across
More informationMeasurement errors and simultaneity
Chapter 9 Measurement errors and simultaneity Erik Biørn and Jayalakshmi Krishnakumar Chapter in: THE ECONOMETRICS OF PANEL DATA Fundamentals and recent developments, Ed by L Mátyás and P Sevestre Springer
More informationWooldridge, Introductory Econometrics, 4th ed. Chapter 15: Instrumental variables and two stage least squares
Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics, 4th ed. Chapter 15: Instrumental variables and two stage least squares Many economic models involve endogeneity: that is, a theoretical relationship does not fit
More informationFinite Sample and Optimal Inference in Possibly Nonstationary ARCH Models with Gaussian and Heavy-Tailed Errors
Finite Sample and Optimal Inference in Possibly Nonstationary ARCH Models with Gaussian and Heavy-Tailed Errors J and E M. I Université de Montréal University of Alicante First version: April 27th, 2004
More informationGMM ESTIMATION FOR DYNAMIC PANELS WITH FIXED EFFECTS AND STRONG INSTRUMENTS AT UNITY. Chirok Han and Peter C. B. Phillips.
GMM ESTIMATION FOR DYNAMIC PANELS WITH FIXED EFFECTS AND STRONG INSTRUMENTS AT UNITY By Chirok Han and Peter C. B. Phillips January 2007 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1599 COWLES FOUNDATION FOR
More information