Download
econometric analysis of panel data n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Econometric Analysis of Panel Data PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Econometric Analysis of Panel Data

Econometric Analysis of Panel Data

235 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Econometric Analysis of Panel Data

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Econometric Analysis of Panel Data • Panel Data Analysis • Random Effects • Assumptions • GLS Estimator • Panel-Robust Variance-Covariance Matrix • ML Estimator • Hypothesis Testing • Test for Random Effects • Fixed Effects vs. Random Effects

  2. Panel Data Analysis • Random Effects Model • ui is random, independent of eit and xit. • Define eit = ui + eit the error components.

  3. Random Effects Model • Assumptions • Strict Exogeneity • X includes a constant term, otherwise E(ui|X)=u. • Homoschedasticity • Constant Auto-covariance (within panels)

  4. Random Effects Model • Assumptions • Cross Section Independence

  5. Random Effects Model • Extensions • Weak Exogeneity • Heteroscedasticity

  6. Random Effects Model • Extensions • Serial Correlation • Spatial Correlation

  7. Model Estimation: GLS • Model Representation

  8. Model Estimation: GLS GLS

  9. Model Estimation: RE-OLS • Partial Group Mean Deviations

  10. Model Estimation: RE-OLS • Model Assumptions • OLS

  11. Model Estimation: RE-OLS • Need a consistent estimator of q: • Estimate the fixed effects model to obtain • Estimate the between model to obtain • Or, estimate the pooled model to obtain • Based on the estimated large sample variances, it is safe to obtain

  12. Model Estimation: RE-OLS • Panel-Robust Variance-Covariance Matrix • Consistent statistical inference for general heteroscedasticity, time series and cross section correlation.

  13. Model Estimation: ML • Log-Likelihood Function

  14. Model Estimation: ML • ML Estimator

  15. Hypothesis TestingTo Pool or Not To Pool, Continued • Test for Var(ui) = 0, that is • If Ti=T for all i, the Lagrange-multiplier test statistic (Breusch-Pagan, 1980) is:

  16. Hypothesis TestingTo Pool or Not To Pool, Continued • For unbalanced panels, the modified Breusch-Pagan LM test for random effects (Baltagi-Li, 1990) is: • Alternative one-side test:

  17. Hypothesis TestingTo Pool or Not To Pool, Continued • References • Baltagi, B. H., and Q. Li, A Langrange Multiplier Test for the Error Components Model with Incomplete Panels, Econometric Review, 9, 1990, 103-107. • Breusch, T. and A. Pagan, “The LM Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics,” Review of Economic Studies, 47, 1980, 239-254.

  18. Hypothesis TestingFixed Effects vs. Random Effects

  19. Hypothesis TestingFixed Effects vs. Random Effects • Fixed effects estimator is consistent under H0 and H1; Random effects estimator is efficient under H0, but it is inconsistent under H1. • Hausman Test Statistic

  20. Hypothesis TestingFixed Effects vs. Random Effects • Alternative (Asym. Eq.) Hausman Test • Estimate any of the random effects models • F Test that g = 0

  21. Hypothesis TestingFixed Effects vs. Random Effects • Ahn-Low Test (1996) • Based on the estimated errors (GLS residuals) of the random effects model, estimate the following regression:

  22. Hypothesis TestingFixed Effects vs. Random Effects • References • Ahn, S.C., and S. Low, A Reformulation of the Hausman Test for Regression Models with Pooled Cross-Section Time-Series Data, Journal of Econometrics, 71, 1996, 309-319. • Baltagi, B.H., and L. Liu, Alternative Ways of Obtaining Hausman’s Test Using Artificial Regressions, Statistics and Probability Letters, 77, 2007, 1413-1417. • Hausman, J.A., Specification Tests in Econometrics, Econometrica, 46, 1978, 1251-1271. • Hausman, J.A. and W.E. Taylor, Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects, Econometrics, 49, 1981, 1377-1398. • Mundlak, Y., On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross-Section Data, Econometrica, 46, 1978, 69-85.

  23. Example: Investment Demand • Grunfeld and Griliches [1960] • i = 10 firms: GM, CH, GE, WE, US, AF, DM, GY, UN, IBM; t = 20 years: 1935-1954 • Iit = Gross investment • Fit = Market value • Cit = Value of the stock of plant and equipment