IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v27y2002i4p657-686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing misspecified non-nested factor demand systems: Some Monte Carlo results

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Manera

    (Istituto di Economia Politica, Università Commerciale "L. Bocconi", Via R. Sarfatti, 25, 20136 Milano, Italia)

Abstract

Empirical factor demand analysis is a topic in which a choice must be made among several competing non-nested functional forms. Each of the commonly used factor demand systems, such as Translog, Generalized Leontief, Quadratic, and Generalized McFadden, exhibits statistical inadequacy when tested for the absence of residual autocorrelation, homoskedasticity and normality. This does not necessarily imply that the whole system is invalid, especially if misspecification affects only a subset of the equations forming the entire system. Since there is no theoretical guidance on how to select the model which is most able to capture the relevant features of the data, formal testing procedures can be useful. In the literature, paired and joint univariate non-nested tests (e.g. Davidson-MacKinnon's J and P tests, Bera-McAleer test and Barten-McAleer test) have been discussed at length, whereas virtually no attention has been paid to multivariate non-nested tests. In this paper we show how multivariate non-nested tests can be derived from their univariate counterparts, and we apply these tests to compare alternative factor demand systems. Since the outcome of a non-nested test is likely to be influenced by the type of misspecification affecting the competing models, we investigate the empirical performance of a multivariate non-nested test using new Monte Carlo experiments. The competing models are compared indirectly via a statistically adequate model which is considered as if it were the DGP. Under such circumstances, the distribution of the non-nested test of an incorrect null, when it is evaluated at the DGP, tends to be closer to the distribution of the test under the correct null, at least in small samples. A non-nested test is expected to select the model which is closest to the DGP. Moreover, we investigate the empirical behaviour of a non-nested test when the DGP has, in turn, autoregressive, heteroskedastic and non-normal errors. Finally, we provide some suggestions for the applied researcher.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Manera, 2002. "Testing misspecified non-nested factor demand systems: Some Monte Carlo results," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 657-686.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:27:y:2002:i:4:p:657-686
    Note: received: November 1999/Final version received: May 2001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00181/papers/2027004/20270657.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matteo Manera & Bruno Sitzia, 2005. "Empirical factor demands and flexible functional forms: a bayesian approach," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 57-75.
    2. Matteo Manera & Michael McAleer, 2005. "Testing Multiple Non‐Nested Factor Demand Systems," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 37-66, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-nested tests; Systems of equations; Factor demands; Flexible functional forms; Monte Carlo evidence.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C30 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:27:y:2002:i:4:p:657-686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.