Finite-Sample Inference Methods for Simultaneous Equations and Models with Unobserved and Generated Regressors

We propose finite sample tests and confidence sets for models with unobserved and generated regressors as well as various models estimated by instrumental variables methods. The validity of the procedures is unaffected by the presence of identification problems or \"weak instruments\", so no detection of such problems is required. We study two distinct approaches for various models considered by Pagan (1984). The first one is an instrument substitution method which generalizes an approach proposed by Anderson and Rubin (1949) and Fuller (1987) for different (although related) problems, while the second one is based on splitting the sample. The instrument substitution method uses the instruments directly, instead of generated regressors, in order to test hypotheses about the \"structural parameters\" of interest and build confidence sets. The second approach relies on \"generated regressors\", which allows a gain in degrees of freedom, and a sample split technique. For inference about general possibly nonlinear transformations of model parameters, projection techniques are proposed. A distributional theory is obtained under the assumptions of Gaussian errors and strictly exogenous regressors. We show that the various tests and confidence sets proposed are (locally) \"asymptotically valid\" under much weaker assumptions. The properties of the tests proposed are examined in simulation experiments. In general, they outperform the usual asymptotic inference methods in terms of both reliability and power. Finally, the techniques suggested are applied to a model of Tobin’s q and to a model of academic performance.

Projection-Based Statistical Inference in Linear Structural Models with Possibly Weak Instruments

It is well known that standard asymptotic theory is not valid or is extremely unreliable in models with identification problems or weak instruments [Dufour (1997, Econometrica), Staiger and Stock (1997, Econometrica), Wang and Zivot (1998, Econometrica), Stock and Wright (2000, Econometrica), Dufour and Jasiak (2001, International Economic Review)]. One possible way out consists here in using a variant of the Anderson-Rubin (1949, Ann. Math. Stat.) procedure. The latter, however, allows one to build exact tests and confidence sets only for the full vector of the coefficients of the endogenous explanatory variables in a structural equation, which in general does not allow for individual coefficients. This problem may in principle be overcome by using projection techniques [Dufour (1997, Econometrica), Dufour and Jasiak (2001, International Economic Review)]. AR-types are emphasized because they are robust to both weak instruments and instrument exclusion. However, these techniques can be implemented only by using costly numerical techniques. In this paper, we provide a complete analytic solution to the problem of building projection-based confidence sets from Anderson-Rubin-type confidence sets. The latter involves the geometric properties of “quadrics” and can be viewed as an extension of usual confidence intervals and ellipsoids. Only least squares techniques are required for building the confidence intervals. We also study by simulation how “conservative” projection-based confidence sets are. Finally, we illustrate the methods proposed by applying them to three different examples: the relationship between trade and growth in a cross-section of countries, returns to education, and a study of production functions in the U.S. economy.

Identification, Weak Instruments and Statistical Inference in Econometrics

We discuss statistical inference problems associated with identification and testability in econometrics, and we emphasize the common nature of the two issues. After reviewing the relevant statistical notions, we consider in turn inference in nonparametric models and recent developments on weakly identified models (or weak instruments). We point out that many hypotheses, for which test procedures are commonly proposed, are not testable at all, while some frequently used econometric methods are fundamentally inappropriate for the models considered. Such situations lead to ill-defined statistical problems and are often associated with a misguided use of asymptotic distributional results. Concerning nonparametric hypotheses, we discuss three basic problems for which such difficulties occur: (1) testing a mean (or a moment) under (too) weak distributional assumptions; (2) inference under heteroskedasticity of unknown form; (3) inference in dynamic models with an unlimited number of parameters. Concerning weakly identified models, we stress that valid inference should be based on proper pivotal functions —a condition not satisfied by standard Wald-type methods based on standard errors — and we discuss recent developments in this field, mainly from the viewpoint of building valid tests and confidence sets. The techniques discussed include alternative proposed statistics, bounds, projection, split-sampling, conditioning, Monte Carlo tests. The possibility of deriving a finite-sample distributional theory, robustness to the presence of weak instruments, and robustness to the specification of a model for endogenous explanatory variables are stressed as important criteria assessing alternative procedures.

Exogeneity, weak identification and instrument selection in econometrics

La dernière décennie a connu un intérêt croissant pour les problèmes posés par les variables instrumentales faibles dans la littérature économétrique, c’est-à-dire les situations où les variables instrumentales sont faiblement corrélées avec la variable à instrumenter. En effet, il est bien connu que lorsque les instruments sont faibles, les distributions des statistiques de Student, de Wald, du ratio de vraisemblance et du multiplicateur de Lagrange ne sont plus standard et dépendent souvent de paramètres de nuisance. Plusieurs études empiriques portant notamment sur les modèles de rendements à l’éducation [Angrist et Krueger (1991, 1995), Angrist et al. (1999), Bound et al. (1995), Dufour et Taamouti (2007)] et d’évaluation des actifs financiers (C-CAPM) [Hansen et Singleton (1982,1983), Stock et Wright (2000)], où les variables instrumentales sont faiblement corrélées avec la variable à instrumenter, ont montré que l’utilisation de ces statistiques conduit souvent à des résultats peu fiables. Un remède à ce problème est l’utilisation de tests robustes à l’identification [Anderson et Rubin (1949), Moreira (2002), Kleibergen (2003), Dufour et Taamouti (2007)]. Cependant, il n’existe aucune littérature économétrique sur la qualité des procédures robustes à l’identification lorsque les instruments disponibles sont endogènes ou à la fois endogènes et faibles. Cela soulève la question de savoir ce qui arrive aux procédures d’inférence robustes à l’identification lorsque certaines variables instrumentales supposées exogènes ne le sont pas effectivement. Plus précisément, qu’arrive-t-il si une variable instrumentale invalide est ajoutée à un ensemble d’instruments valides? Ces procédures se comportent-elles différemment? Et si l’endogénéité des variables instrumentales pose des difficultés majeures à l’inférence statistique, peut-on proposer des procédures de tests qui sélectionnent les instruments lorsqu’ils sont à la fois forts et valides? Est-il possible de proposer les proédures de sélection d’instruments qui demeurent valides même en présence d’identification faible? Cette thèse se focalise sur les modèles structurels (modèles à équations simultanées) et apporte des réponses à ces questions à travers quatre essais. Le premier essai est publié dans Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 138 (2008) 2649 – 2661. Dans cet essai, nous analysons les effets de l’endogénéité des instruments sur deux statistiques de test robustes à l’identification: la statistique d’Anderson et Rubin (AR, 1949) et la statistique de Kleibergen (K, 2003), avec ou sans instruments faibles. D’abord, lorsque le paramètre qui contrôle l’endogénéité des instruments est fixe (ne dépend pas de la taille de l’échantillon), nous montrons que toutes ces procédures sont en général convergentes contre la présence d’instruments invalides (c’est-à-dire détectent la présence d’instruments invalides) indépendamment de leur qualité (forts ou faibles). Nous décrivons aussi des cas où cette convergence peut ne pas tenir, mais la distribution asymptotique est modifiée d’une manière qui pourrait conduire à des distorsions de niveau même pour de grands échantillons. Ceci inclut, en particulier, les cas où l’estimateur des double moindres carrés demeure convergent, mais les tests sont asymptotiquement invalides. Ensuite, lorsque les instruments sont localement exogènes (c’est-à-dire le paramètre d’endogénéité converge vers zéro lorsque la taille de l’échantillon augmente), nous montrons que ces tests convergent vers des distributions chi-carré non centrées, que les instruments soient forts ou faibles. Nous caractérisons aussi les situations où le paramètre de non centralité est nul et la distribution asymptotique des statistiques demeure la même que dans le cas des instruments valides (malgré la présence des instruments invalides). Le deuxième essai étudie l’impact des instruments faibles sur les tests de spécification du type Durbin-Wu-Hausman (DWH) ainsi que le test de Revankar et Hartley (1973). Nous proposons une analyse en petit et grand échantillon de la distribution de ces tests sous l’hypothèse nulle (niveau) et l’alternative (puissance), incluant les cas où l’identification est déficiente ou faible (instruments faibles). Notre analyse en petit échantillon founit plusieurs perspectives ainsi que des extensions des précédentes procédures. En effet, la caractérisation de la distribution de ces statistiques en petit échantillon permet la construction des tests de Monte Carlo exacts pour l’exogénéité même avec les erreurs non Gaussiens. Nous montrons que ces tests sont typiquement robustes aux intruments faibles (le niveau est contrôlé). De plus, nous fournissons une caractérisation de la puissance des tests, qui exhibe clairement les facteurs qui déterminent la puissance. Nous montrons que les tests n’ont pas de puissance lorsque tous les instruments sont faibles [similaire à Guggenberger(2008)]. Cependant, la puissance existe tant qu’au moins un seul instruments est fort. La conclusion de Guggenberger (2008) concerne le cas où tous les instruments sont faibles (un cas d’intérêt mineur en pratique). Notre théorie asymptotique sous les hypothèses affaiblies confirme la théorie en échantillon fini. Par ailleurs, nous présentons une analyse de Monte Carlo indiquant que: (1) l’estimateur des moindres carrés ordinaires est plus efficace que celui des doubles moindres carrés lorsque les instruments sont faibles et l’endogenéité modérée [conclusion similaire à celle de Kiviet and Niemczyk (2007)]; (2) les estimateurs pré-test basés sur les tests d’exogenété ont une excellente performance par rapport aux doubles moindres carrés. Ceci suggère que la méthode des variables instrumentales ne devrait être appliquée que si l’on a la certitude d’avoir des instruments forts. Donc, les conclusions de Guggenberger (2008) sont mitigées et pourraient être trompeuses. Nous illustrons nos résultats théoriques à travers des expériences de simulation et deux applications empiriques: la relation entre le taux d’ouverture et la croissance économique et le problème bien connu du rendement à l’éducation. Le troisième essai étend le test d’exogénéité du type Wald proposé par Dufour (1987) aux cas où les erreurs de la régression ont une distribution non-normale. Nous proposons une nouvelle version du précédent test qui est valide même en présence d’erreurs non-Gaussiens. Contrairement aux procédures de test d’exogénéité usuelles (tests de Durbin-Wu-Hausman et de Rvankar- Hartley), le test de Wald permet de résoudre un problème courant dans les travaux empiriques qui consiste à tester l’exogénéité partielle d’un sous ensemble de variables. Nous proposons deux nouveaux estimateurs pré-test basés sur le test de Wald qui performent mieux (en terme d’erreur quadratique moyenne) que l’estimateur IV usuel lorsque les variables instrumentales sont faibles et l’endogénéité modérée. Nous montrons également que ce test peut servir de procédure de sélection de variables instrumentales. Nous illustrons les résultats théoriques par deux applications empiriques: le modèle bien connu d’équation du salaire [Angist et Krueger (1991, 1999)] et les rendements d’échelle [Nerlove (1963)]. Nos résultats suggèrent que l’éducation de la mère expliquerait le décrochage de son fils, que l’output est une variable endogène dans l’estimation du coût de la firme et que le prix du fuel en est un instrument valide pour l’output. Le quatrième essai résout deux problèmes très importants dans la littérature économétrique. D’abord, bien que le test de Wald initial ou étendu permette de construire les régions de confiance et de tester les restrictions linéaires sur les covariances, il suppose que les paramètres du modèle sont identifiés. Lorsque l’identification est faible (instruments faiblement corrélés avec la variable à instrumenter), ce test n’est en général plus valide. Cet essai développe une procédure d’inférence robuste à l’identification (instruments faibles) qui permet de construire des régions de confiance pour la matrices de covariances entre les erreurs de la régression et les variables explicatives (possiblement endogènes). Nous fournissons les expressions analytiques des régions de confiance et caractérisons les conditions nécessaires et suffisantes sous lesquelles ils sont bornés. La procédure proposée demeure valide même pour de petits échantillons et elle est aussi asymptotiquement robuste à l’hétéroscédasticité et l’autocorrélation des erreurs. Ensuite, les résultats sont utilisés pour développer les tests d’exogénéité partielle robustes à l’identification. Les simulations Monte Carlo indiquent que ces tests contrôlent le niveau et ont de la puissance même si les instruments sont faibles. Ceci nous permet de proposer une procédure valide de sélection de variables instrumentales même s’il y a un problème d’identification. La procédure de sélection des instruments est basée sur deux nouveaux estimateurs pré-test qui combinent l’estimateur IV usuel et les estimateurs IV partiels. Nos simulations montrent que: (1) tout comme l’estimateur des moindres carrés ordinaires, les estimateurs IV partiels sont plus efficaces que l’estimateur IV usuel lorsque les instruments sont faibles et l’endogénéité modérée; (2) les estimateurs pré-test ont globalement une excellente performance comparés à l’estimateur IV usuel. Nous illustrons nos résultats théoriques par deux applications empiriques: la relation entre le taux d’ouverture et la croissance économique et le modèle de rendements à l’éducation. Dans la première application, les études antérieures ont conclu que les instruments n’étaient pas trop faibles [Dufour et Taamouti (2007)] alors qu’ils le sont fortement dans la seconde [Bound (1995), Doko et Dufour (2009)]. Conformément à nos résultats théoriques, nous trouvons les régions de confiance non bornées pour la covariance dans le cas où les instruments sont assez faibles.

Organizational Design of R&D Activities

This paper addresses the question of whether R&D should be carried out by an independent research unit or be produced in-house by the firm marketing the innovation. We define two organizational structures. In an integrated structure, the firm that markets the innovation also carries out and finances research leading to the innovation. In an independent structure, the firm that markets the innovation buys it from an independent research unit which is financed externally. We compare the two structures under the assumption that the research unit has some private information about the real cost of developing the new product. When development costs are negatively correlated with revenues from the innovation, the integrated structure dominates. The independent structure dominates in the opposite case.

Quadratic M-Estimators for ARCH-Type Processes

This paper addresses the issue of estimating semiparametric time series models specified by their conditional mean and conditional variance. We stress the importance of using joint restrictions on the mean and variance. This leads us to take into account the covariance between the mean and the variance and the variance of the variance, that is, the skewness and kurtosis. We establish the direct links between the usual parametric estimation methods, namely, the QMLE, the GMM and the M-estimation. The ususal univariate QMLE is, under non-normality, less efficient than the optimal GMM estimator. However, the bivariate QMLE based on the dependent variable and its square is as efficient as the optimal GMM one. A Monte Carlo analysis confirms the relevance of our approach, in particular, the importance of skewness.

Testing Mean-Variance Efficiency in CAPM with Possibly Non-Gaussian Errors : An Exact Simulation-Based Approach

In this paper we propose exact likelihood-based mean-variance efficiency tests of the market portfolio in the context of Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), allowing for a wide class of error distributions which include normality as a special case. These tests are developed in the frame-work of multivariate linear regressions (MLR). It is well known however that despite their simple statistical structure, standard asymptotically justified MLR-based tests are unreliable. In financial econometrics, exact tests have been proposed for a few specific hypotheses [Jobson and Korkie (Journal of Financial Economics, 1982), MacKinlay (Journal of Financial Economics, 1987), Gib-bons, Ross and Shanken (Econometrica, 1989), Zhou (Journal of Finance 1993)], most of which depend on normality. For the gaussian model, our tests correspond to Gibbons, Ross and Shanken’s mean-variance efficiency tests. In non-gaussian contexts, we reconsider mean-variance efficiency tests allowing for multivariate Student-t and gaussian mixture errors. Our framework allows to cast more evidence on whether the normality assumption is too restrictive when testing the CAPM. We also propose exact multivariate diagnostic checks (including tests for multivariate GARCH and mul-tivariate generalization of the well known variance ratio tests) and goodness of fit tests as well as a set estimate for the intervening nuisance parameters. Our results [over five-year subperiods] show the following: (i) multivariate normality is rejected in most subperiods, (ii) residual checks reveal no significant departures from the multivariate i.i.d. assumption, and (iii) mean-variance efficiency tests of the market portfolio is not rejected as frequently once it is allowed for the possibility of non-normal errors.

Finite-Sample Diagnostics for Multivariate Regressions with Applications to Linear Asset Pricing Models

In this paper, we propose several finite-sample specification tests for multivariate linear regressions (MLR) with applications to asset pricing models. We focus on departures from the assumption of i.i.d. errors assumption, at univariate and multivariate levels, with Gaussian and non-Gaussian (including Student t) errors. The univariate tests studied extend existing exact procedures by allowing for unspecified parameters in the error distributions (e.g., the degrees of freedom in the case of the Student t distribution). The multivariate tests are based on properly standardized multivariate residuals to ensure invariance to MLR coefficients and error covariances. We consider tests for serial correlation, tests for multivariate GARCH and sign-type tests against general dependencies and asymmetries. The procedures proposed provide exact versions of those applied in Shanken (1990) which consist in combining univariate specification tests. Specifically, we combine tests across equations using the MC test procedure to avoid Bonferroni-type bounds. Since non-Gaussian based tests are not pivotal, we apply the “maximized MC” (MMC) test method [Dufour (2002)], where the MC p-value for the tested hypothesis (which depends on nuisance parameters) is maximized (with respect to these nuisance parameters) to control the test’s significance level. The tests proposed are applied to an asset pricing model with observable risk-free rates, using monthly returns on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) portfolios over five-year subperiods from 1926-1995. Our empirical results reveal the following. Whereas univariate exact tests indicate significant serial correlation, asymmetries and GARCH in some equations, such effects are much less prevalent once error cross-equation covariances are accounted for. In addition, significant departures from the i.i.d. hypothesis are less evident once we allow for non-Gaussian errors.

Exact Skewness-Kurtosis Tests for Multivariate Normality and Goodness-of-fit in Multivariate Regressions with Application to Asset Pricing Models

We study the problem of testing the error distribution in a multivariate linear regression (MLR) model. The tests are functions of appropriately standardized multivariate least squares residuals whose distribution is invariant to the unknown cross-equation error covariance matrix. Empirical multivariate skewness and kurtosis criteria are then compared to simulation-based estimate of their expected value under the hypothesized distribution. Special cases considered include testing multivariate normal, Student t; normal mixtures and stable error models. In the Gaussian case, finite-sample versions of the standard multivariate skewness and kurtosis tests are derived. To do this, we exploit simple, double and multi-stage Monte Carlo test methods. For non-Gaussian distribution families involving nuisance parameters, confidence sets are derived for the the nuisance parameters and the error distribution. The procedures considered are evaluated in a small simulation experi-ment. Finally, the tests are applied to an asset pricing model with observable risk-free rates, using monthly returns on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) portfolios over five-year subperiods from 1926-1995.

Methods to Estimate Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Models

This paper employs the one-sector Real Business Cycle model as a testing ground for four different procedures to estimate Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) models. The procedures are: 1 ) Maximum Likelihood, with and without measurement errors and incorporating Bayesian priors, 2) Generalized Method of Moments, 3) Simulated Method of Moments, and 4) Indirect Inference. Monte Carlo analysis indicates that all procedures deliver reasonably good estimates under the null hypothesis. However, there are substantial differences in statistical and computational efficiency in the small samples currently available to estimate DSGE models. GMM and SMM appear to be more robust to misspecification than the alternative procedures. The implications of the stochastic singularity of DSGE models for each estimation method are fully discussed.

Exact Multivariate Tests of Asset Pricing Models with Stable Asymmetric Distributions

In this paper, we propose exact inference procedures for asset pricing models that can be formulated in the framework of a multivariate linear regression (CAPM), allowing for stable error distributions. The normality assumption on the distribution of stock returns is usually rejected in empirical studies, due to excess kurtosis and asymmetry. To model such data, we propose a comprehensive statistical approach which allows for alternative - possibly asymmetric - heavy tailed distributions without the use of large-sample approximations. The methods suggested are based on Monte Carlo test techniques. Goodness-of-fit tests are formally incorporated to ensure that the error distributions considered are empirically sustainable, from which exact confidence sets for the unknown tail area and asymmetry parameters of the stable error distribution are derived. Tests for the efficiency of the market portfolio (zero intercepts) which explicitly allow for the presence of (unknown) nuisance parameter in the stable error distribution are derived. The methods proposed are applied to monthly returns on 12 portfolios of the New York Stock Exchange over the period 1926-1995 (5 year subperiods). We find that stable possibly skewed distributions provide statistically significant improvement in goodness-of-fit and lead to fewer rejections of the efficiency hypothesis.

Distribution-Free Bounds for Serial Correlation Coefficients in Heteroskedastic Symmetric Time Series

We consider the problem of testing whether the observations X1, ..., Xn of a time series are independent with unspecified (possibly nonidentical) distributions symmetric about a common known median. Various bounds on the distributions of serial correlation coefficients are proposed: exponential bounds, Eaton-type bounds, Chebyshev bounds and Berry-Esséen-Zolotarev bounds. The bounds are exact in finite samples, distribution-free and easy to compute. The performance of the bounds is evaluated and compared with traditional serial dependence tests in a simulation experiment. The procedures proposed are applied to U.S. data on interest rates (commercial paper rate).

Asymptotic Distribution of a Simple Linear Estimator for VARMA Models in Echelon Form

In this paper, we study the asymptotic distribution of a simple two-stage (Hannan-Rissanen-type) linear estimator for stationary invertible vector autoregressive moving average (VARMA) models in the echelon form representation. General conditions for consistency and asymptotic normality are given. A consistent estimator of the asymptotic covariance matrix of the estimator is also provided, so that tests and confidence intervals can easily be constructed.

Finite-Sample Simulation-Based Inference in VAR Models with Applications to Order Selection and Causality Testing

Statistical tests in vector autoregressive (VAR) models are typically based on large-sample approximations, involving the use of asymptotic distributions or bootstrap techniques. After documenting that such methods can be very misleading even with fairly large samples, especially when the number of lags or the number of equations is not small, we propose a general simulation-based technique that allows one to control completely the level of tests in parametric VAR models. In particular, we show that maximized Monte Carlo tests [Dufour (2002)] can provide provably exact tests for such models, whether they are stationary or integrated. Applications to order selection and causality testing are considered as special cases. The technique developed is applied to quarterly and monthly VAR models of the U.S. economy, comprising income, money, interest rates and prices, over the period 1965-1996.