Panel LM Unit‐root Tests with Level Shifts*

This paper proposes a new panel unit‐root test based on the Lagrangian multiplier (LM) principle. We show that the asymptotic distribution of the new panel LM test is not affected by the presence of structural shifts. This result holds under a mild condition that N/T→k, where k is any finite constant. Our simulation study shows that the panel LM unit‐root test is not only robust to the presence of structural shifts, but is more powerful than the popular Im, Pesaran and Shin (IPS) test. We apply our new test to the purchasing power parity (PPP) hypothesis and find strong evidence for PPP.     

Diagnostic Tests of Cross‐section Independence for Limited Dependent Variable Panel Data Models*

This article considers the problem of testing for cross‐section independence in limited dependent variable panel data models. It derives a Lagrangian multiplier (LM) test and shows that in terms of generalized residuals of Gourieroux et al. (1987) it reduces to the LM test of Breusch and Pagan (1980) . Because of the tendency of the LM test to over‐reject in panels with large N (cross‐section dimension), we also consider the application of the cross‐section dependence test (CD) proposed by Pesaran (2004) . In Monte Carlo experiments it emerges that for most combinations of N and T the CD test is correctly sized, whereas the validity of the LM test requires T (time series dimension) to be quite large relative to N. We illustrate the cross‐sectional independence tests with an application to a probit panel data model of roll‐call votes in the US Congress and find that the votes display a significant degree of cross‐section dependence.     

Testing for Seasonal Unit Roots in Monthly Panels of Time Series*

We consider the problem of testing for seasonal unit roots in monthly panel data. To this aim, we generalize the quarterly cross‐sectionally augmented Hylleberg–Engle–Granger–Yoo (CHEGY) test to the monthly case. This parametric test is contrasted with a new non‐parametric test, which is the panel counterpart to the univariate record unit–root seasonal (RURS) test that relies on counting extrema in time series. All methods are applied to an empirical data set on tourism in Austrian provinces. The power properties of the tests are evaluated in simulation experiments that are tuned to the tourism data.     

Panel Unit‐root Tests for Cross‐sectionally Correlated Panels: A Monte Carlo Comparison*

This paper deals with the finite‐sample performance of a set of unit‐root tests for cross‐correlated panels. Most of the available macroeconomic time series cover short time periods. The lack of information, in terms of time observations, implies that univariate tests are not powerful enough to reject the null of a unit‐root while panel tests, by exploiting the large number of cross‐sectional units, have been shown to be a promising way of increasing the power of unit‐root tests. We investigate the finite sample properties of recently proposed panel unit‐root tests for cross‐sectionally correlated panels. Specifically, the size and power of Choi's [Econometric Theory and Practice: Frontiers of Analysis and Applied Research: Essays in Honor of Peter C. B. Phillips, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)], Bai and Ng's [Econometrica (2004), Vol. 72, p. 1127], Moon and Perron's [Journal of Econometrics (2004), Vol. 122, p. 81], and Phillips and Sul's [Econometrics Journal (2003), Vol. 6, p. 217] tests are analysed by a Monte Carlo simulation study. In synthesis, Moon and Perron's tests show good size and power for different values of T and N, and model specifications. Focusing on Bai and Ng's procedure, the simulation study highlights that the pooled Dickey–Fuller generalized least squares test provides higher power than the pooled augmented Dickey–Fuller test for the analysis of non‐stationary properties of the idiosyncratic components. Choi's tests are strongly oversized when the common factor influences the cross‐sectional units heterogeneously.     

Cointegration Testing in Panels with Common Factors*

Panel unit‐root and no‐cointegration tests that rely on cross‐sectional independence of the panel unit experience severe size distortions when this assumption is violated, as has, for example, been shown by Banerjee, Marcellino and Osbat [Econometrics Journal (2004), Vol. 7, pp. 322–340; Empirical Economics (2005), Vol. 30, pp. 77–91] via Monte Carlo simulations. Several studies have recently addressed this issue for panel unit‐root tests using a common factor structure to model the cross‐sectional dependence, but not much work has been done yet for panel no‐cointegration tests. This paper proposes a model for panel no‐cointegration using an unobserved common factor structure, following the study by Bai and Ng [Econometrica (2004), Vol. 72, pp. 1127–1177] for panel unit roots. We distinguish two important cases: (i) the case when the non‐stationarity in the data is driven by a reduced number of common stochastic trends, and (ii) the case where we have common and idiosyncratic stochastic trends present in the data. We discuss the homogeneity restrictions on the cointegrating vectors resulting from the presence of common factor cointegration. Furthermore, we study the asymptotic behaviour of some existing residual‐based panel no‐cointegration tests, as suggested by Kao [Journal of Econometrics (1999), Vol. 90, pp. 1–44] and Pedroni [Econometric Theory (2004a), Vol. 20, pp. 597–625]. Under the data‐generating processes (DGP) used, the test statistics are no longer asymptotically normal, and convergence occurs at rate T rather than as for independent panels. We then examine the possibilities of testing for various forms of no‐cointegration by extracting the common factors and individual components from the observed data directly and then testing for no‐cointegration using residual‐based panel tests applied to the defactored data.     

Local Asymptotic Power of Breitung's Test*

In this article, we derive the local asymptotic power function of the unit root test proposed by Breitung [Journal of Econometrics (2002) Vol. 108, pp. 343–363]. Breitung's test is a non‐parametric test and is free of nuisance parameters. We compare the local power curve of the Breitungs’ test with that of the Dickey–Fuller test. This comparison is in fact a quantification of the loss of power that one has to accept when applying a non‐parametric test.     

On Testing Conditional Sigma – Convergence*

In a cross‐section where the initial distribution of observations differs from the steady‐state distribution and initial values matter, convergence is best measured in terms of σ‐convergence over a fixed time period. For this setting, we propose a new simple Wald test for conditional σ‐convergence. According to our Monte Carlo simulations, this test performs well and its power is comparable with the available tests of unconditional convergence. We apply two versions of the test to conditional convergence in the size of European manufacturing firms. The null hypothesis of no convergence is rejected for all country groups, most single economies, and for younger firms of our sample of 49,646 firms.     

A Panel CUSUM Test of the Null of Cointegration*

This paper proposes a simple residual‐based panel CUSUM test of the null hypothesis of cointegration. The test has a limiting normal distribution that is free of nuisance parameters, it is robust to heteroskedasticity and it allows for mixtures of cointegrated and spurious alternatives. Our Monte Carlo results suggest that the test has small‐size distortions and reasonable power. In our empirical application to international R&D spillovers, we present evidence suggesting that total factor productivity is heterogeneously cointegrated with foreign and domestic R&D capital stocks.     

Simulation‐based Finite Sample Linearity Test against Smooth Transition Models*

In this paper, we use Monte Carlo (MC) testing techniques for testing linearity against smooth transition models. The MC approach allows us to introduce a new test that differs in two respects from the tests existing in the literature. First, the test is exact in the sense that the probability of rejecting the null when it is true is always less than or equal to the nominal size of the test. Secondly, the test is not based on an auxiliary regression obtained by replacing the model under the alternative by approximations based on a Taylor expansion. We also apply MC testing methods for size correcting the test proposed by Luukkonen, Saikkonen and Teräsvirta (Biometrika, Vol. 75, 1988, p. 491). The results show that the power loss implied by the auxiliary regression‐based test is non‐existent compared with a supremum‐based test but is more substantial when compared with the three other tests under consideration.     

Testing for Multicointegration in Panel Data with Common Factors*

This paper addresses the concept of multicointegration in a panel data framework and builds upon the panel data cointegration procedures developed in Pedroni [Econometric Theory (2004), Vol. 20, pp. 597–625]. When individuals are either cross‐section independent, or cross‐section dependence can be removed by cross‐section demeaning, our approach can be applied to the wider framework of mixed I(2) and I(1) stochastic processes. The paper also deals with the issue of cross‐section dependence using approximate common‐factor models. Finite sample performance is investigated through Monte Carlo simulations. Finally, we illustrate the use of the procedure investigating an inventories, sales and production relationship for a panel of US industries.     

Testing for time-invariant unobserved heterogeneity in generalized linear models for panel data

Recent literature on panel data emphasizes the importance of accounting for time-varying unobservable individual effects, which may stem from either omitted individual characteristics or macro-level shocks that affect each individual unit differently. In this paper, we propose a simple specification test of the null hypothesis that the individual effects are time-invariant against the alternative that they are time-varying. Our test is an application of Hausman (1978) testing procedure and can be used for any generalized linear model for panel data that admits a sufficient statistic for the individual effect. This is a wide class of models which includes the Gaussian linear model and a variety of nonlinear models typically employed for discrete or categorical outcomes. The basic idea of the test is to compare two alternative estimators of the model parameters based on two different formulations of the conditional maximum likelihood method. Our approach does not require assumptions on the distribution of unobserved heterogeneity, nor it requires the latter to be independent of the regressors in the model. We investigate the finite sample properties of the test through a set of Monte Carlo experiments. Our results show that the test performs well, with small size distortions and good power properties. We use a health economics example based on data from the Health and Retirement Study to illustrate the proposed test.     

Power of Tests for Unit Roots in the Presence of a Linear Trend*

Dickey and Fuller [Econometrica (1981) Vol. 49, pp. 1057–1072] suggested unit‐root tests for an autoregressive model with a linear trend conditional on an initial observation. TPower of tests for unit roots in the presence of a linear trendightly different model with a random initial value in which nuisance parameters can easily be eliminated by an invariant reduction of the model. We show that invariance arguments can also be used when comparing power within a conditional model. In the context of the conditional model, the Dickey–Fuller test is shown to be more stringent than a number of unit‐root tests motivated by models with random initial value. The power of the Dickey–Fuller test can be improved by making assumptions to the initial value. The practitioner therefore has to trade‐off robustness and power, as assumptions about initial values are hard to test, but can give more power.     

Panel Stationarity Test with Structural Breaks*

In this paper, we extend the heterogeneous panel data stationarity test of Hadri [Econometrics Journal, Vol. 3 (2000) pp. 148–161] to the cases where breaks are taken into account. Four models with different patterns of breaks under the null hypothesis are specified. Two of the models have been already proposed by Carrion‐i‐Silvestre et al. [Econometrics Journal, Vol. 8 (2005) pp. 159–175]. The moments of the statistics corresponding to the four models are derived in closed form via characteristic functions. We also provide the exact moments of a modified statistic that do not asymptotically depend on the location of the break point under the null hypothesis. The cases where the break point is unknown are also considered. For the model with breaks in the level and no time trend and for the model with breaks in the level and in the time trend, Carrion‐i‐Silvestre et al. [Econometrics Journal, Vol. 8 (2005) pp. 159–175] showed that the number of breaks and their positions may be allowed to differ across individuals for cases with known and unknown breaks. Their results can easily be extended to the proposed modified statistic. The asymptotic distributions of all the statistics proposed are derived under the null hypothesis and are shown to be normally distributed. We show by simulations that our suggested tests have in general good performance in finite samples except the modified test. In an empirical application to the consumer prices of 22 OECD countries during the period from 1953 to 2003, we found evidence of stationarity once a structural break and cross‐sectional dependence are accommodated.     

Cross‐sectional Dependency and Size Distortion in a Small‐sample Homogeneous Panel Data Unit Root Test*

In this paper, we investigate the effects of cross‐sectional disturbance correlation in a homogeneous panel data unit root test. As reported by other authors, the unit root test has incorrect size in the presence of cross‐sectional correlation. We suggest that a previously known estimator can be used to reduce the size distortions. We supply response surface estimates for critical values and study the size characteristics of the proposed test. We find that the suggested estimator performs well in small‐sample homogeneous panel data unit root tests. The reduction in size distortion comes at a small cost of lower power against a stationary alternative.     

Truncated Product Methods for Panel Unit Root Tests*

This paper proposes two new panel unit root tests based on Zaykin et al. (2002) ’s truncated product method. The first one assumes constant correlation between P‐values and the second one uses sieve bootstrap to allow for general forms of cross‐section dependence in the panel units. Monte Carlo simulation shows that both tests have reasonably good size and are powerful in cases of some very large P‐values. The proposed tests are applied to a panel of real GDP and inflation density forecasts, resulting in evidence that professional forecasters may not update their forecast precision in an optimal Bayesian way.     

A Simple Test for Cointegration in Dependent Panels with Structural Breaks*

This paper develops a very simple test for the null hypothesis of no cointegration in panel data. The test is general enough to allow for heteroskedastic and serially correlated errors, unit‐specific time trends, cross‐sectional dependence and unknown structural breaks in both the intercept and slope of the cointegrated regression, which may be located at different dates for different units. The limiting distribution of the test is derived, and is found to be normal and free of nuisance parameters under the null. A small simulation study is also conducted to investigate the small‐sample properties of the test. In our empirical application, we provide new evidence concerning the purchasing power parity hypothesis.     

Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation*

Heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (HAC) estimation commonly involves the use of prewhitening filters based on simple autoregressive models. In such applications, small sample bias in the estimation of autoregressive coefficients is transmitted to the recolouring filter, leading to HAC variance estimates that can be badly biased. The present paper provides an analysis of these issues using asymptotic expansions and simulations. The approach we recommend involves the use of recursive demeaning procedures that mitigate the effects of small‐sample autoregressive bias. Moreover, a commonly used restriction rule on the prewhitening estimates (that first‐order autoregressive coefficient estimates, or largest eigenvalues, >0.97 be replaced by 0.97) adversely interferes with the power of unit‐root and [ Kwiatkowski, Phillips, Schmidt and Shin (1992) Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 54, pp. 159–178] (KPSS) tests. We provide a new boundary condition rule that improves the size and power properties of these tests. Some illustrations of the effects of these adjustments on the size and power of KPSS testing are given. Using prewhitened HAC estimates and the new boundary condition rule, the KPSS test is consistent, in contrast to KPSS testing that uses conventional prewhitened HAC estimates [ Lee, J. S. (1996) Economics Letters, Vol. 51, pp. 131–137].     

Dickey–Fuller Type of Tests against Nonlinear Dynamic Models*

In this paper, we introduce several test statistics testing the null hypothesis of a random walk (with or without drift) against models that accommodate a smooth nonlinear shift in the level, the dynamic structure and the trend. We derive analytical limiting distributions for all the tests. The power performance of the tests is compared with that of the unit‐root tests by Phillips and Perron [Biometrika (1988), Vol. 75, pp. 335–346], and Leybourne, Newbold and Vougas [Journal of Time Series Analysis (1998), Vol. 19, pp. 83–97]. In the presence of a gradual change in the deterministics and in the dynamics, our tests are superior in terms of power.     

A consistent nonparametric test for nonlinear causality—Specification in time series regression

Since the pioneering work by Granger (1969), many authors have proposed tests of causality between economic time series. Most of them are concerned only with “linear causality in mean”, or if a series linearly affects the (conditional) mean of the other series. It is no doubt of primary interest, but dependence between series may be nonlinear, and/or not only through the conditional mean. Indeed conditional heteroskedastic models are widely studied recently. The purpose of this paper is to propose a nonparametric test for possibly nonlinear causality. Taking into account that dependence in higher order moments are becoming an important issue especially in financial time series, we also consider a test for causality up to the Kth conditional moment. Statistically, we can also view this test as a nonparametric omitted variable test in time series regression. A desirable property of the test is that it has nontrivial power against T^1/2-local alternatives, where T is the sample size. Also, we can form a test statistic accordingly if we have some knowledge on the alternative hypothesis. Furthermore, we show that the test statistic includes most of the omitted variable test statistics as special cases asymptotically. The null asymptotic distribution is not normal, but we can easily calculate the critical regions by simulation. Monte Carlo experiments show that the proposed test has good size and power properties.     

Combination of Tests for Cointegration in Cross‐Correlated Panels

In this paper, Cheng and Sheng's (2017) combination of ‘combinations of P‐values’ (CCP) is extended to a combination of more than two tests and applied for cointegration testing in cross‐correlated panels. In a Monte Carlo experiment, power and size of the different combinations of combinations are investigated. If uncertainty about the panel configuration is taken into account, the results indicate that a multi‐test combination can minimize power losses. Furthermore, the usefulness of the combinations studied is illustrated by an application to international interest rate linkage. Cross‐sectional dependencies in both the simulation and the empirical studies are accounted for by using the block bootstrap.