2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2012.12.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Alternative representations for cointegrated panels with global stochastic trends

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In order to ensure comparability with the DGP based on moving average errors and guarantee stationarity of the resulting autoregressive errors, we set Ψ 11 = 0.3, Ψ 12 = 0.2, Ψ 22 = 0.6; moreover, we choose a value of Ψ 21,i that produces α i,z = γ i = −0.8 as in the simulations above. For this purpose, we make use of the results in Cappuccio and Lubian (1996) and Gengenbach et al (2013) who derive the conditional and marginal ECM representation for a cointegration model as in (14)- (15). In particular, when the idiosyncratic errors are AR(1) it can be shown that the error correction coefficient in the marginal model has the form:…”
Section: Panel a Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In order to ensure comparability with the DGP based on moving average errors and guarantee stationarity of the resulting autoregressive errors, we set Ψ 11 = 0.3, Ψ 12 = 0.2, Ψ 22 = 0.6; moreover, we choose a value of Ψ 21,i that produces α i,z = γ i = −0.8 as in the simulations above. For this purpose, we make use of the results in Cappuccio and Lubian (1996) and Gengenbach et al (2013) who derive the conditional and marginal ECM representation for a cointegration model as in (14)- (15). In particular, when the idiosyncratic errors are AR(1) it can be shown that the error correction coefficient in the marginal model has the form:…”
Section: Panel a Ofmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results are not reported to save space, but they are available upon request 16. Hence we do not test other aspects of their specification, such as the fact that cross-sectional dependence is not taken into account 17. To avoid notational clutter we present here an ARDL(1,1,1) version of the model.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Remark 3.5. As discussed in Gengenbach et al (2013), the representation used in this chapter can actually be derived as an alternative to the triangular systems representation adopted by . The main difference is that the shortrun dynamics are explicitly treated parametrically.…”
Section: Model and Assumptionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The error correction model allows us to model the short run dynamics explicitly. As pointed out in Gengenbach et al (2013), this model representation for cointegrated panels can be used as an alternative to the triangular representation of . It is also used in Gengenbach et al (2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%