IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v33y2001i2p237-247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative lag length selection criteria and the split-trend stationarity hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Weber

Abstract

This study asks whether evidence that key macroeconomic time series are stationary around broken trends is robust to using different criteria to determine the lag length in the ADF regressions. When lag lengths are determined using the Schwarz criterion or two different specific-to-general methods, tests for unit roots in several series in the Nelson-Plosser (1982) data and in US postwar real GNP find weaker evidence against the unit root hypothesis than either Perron (1989), who set the date for the break in the trend a priori or Zivot and Andrews (1992), who determined the break date endogenously.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Weber, 2001. "Alternative lag length selection criteria and the split-trend stationarity hypothesis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 237-247.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:33:y:2001:i:2:p:237-247
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840121781
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036840121781
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036840121781?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 2002. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-44, January.
    2. Hall, Alastair R, 1994. "Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series with Pretest Data-Based Model Selection," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(4), pages 461-470, October.
    3. Nelson, Charles R. & Plosser, Charles I., 1982. "Trends and random walks in macroeconmic time series : Some evidence and implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 139-162.
    4. Friedman, Milton, 1990. "The Crime of 1873," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1159-1194, December.
    5. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    6. Banerjee, Anindya & Lumsdaine, Robin L & Stock, James H, 1992. "Recursive and Sequential Tests of the Unit-Root and Trend-Break Hypotheses: Theory and International Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 271-287, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Altinay, Galip & Karagol, Erdal, 2004. "Structural break, unit root, and the causality between energy consumption and GDP in Turkey," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 985-994, November.
    2. ALTINAY, Galip, 2005. "Structural Breaks in Long-Term Turkish Macroeconomic Data,1923-2003," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 5(4).
    3. repec:ehu:biltok:5629 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shyh-Wei Chen, 2008. "Are 19 Developed Countries' Real Per Capita GDP levels Non-stationary? A Revisit," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(2), pages 1-11.
    2. Murray, Christian J. & Nelson, Charles R., 2000. "The uncertain trend in U.S. GDP," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 79-95, August.
    3. Nelson, Charles R & Piger, Jeremy & Zivot, Eric, 2001. "Markov Regime Switching and Unit-Root Tests," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 404-415, October.
    4. Marashdeh, Hazem & Wilson, E.J., 2005. "Structural Changes in the Middle East Stock Markets: The case of Israel and Arab Countries," Economics Working Papers wp05-22, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    5. Norman J. Morin & John M. Roberts, 1999. "Is hysteresis important for U.S. unemployment?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 1999-56, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    6. Perron, Pierre, 1997. "Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 355-385, October.
    7. Charles Nelson & Jeremy Piger & Eric Zivot, 1999. "Unit Root Tests in the Presence of Markov Regime-Switching," Working Papers 0040, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    8. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2008:i:2:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Smyth, Russell & Inder, Brett, 2004. "Is Chinese provincial real GDP per capita nonstationary?: Evidence from multiple trend break unit root tests," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24.
    10. Raghbendra Jha & Anurag Sharma, 2004. "Structural Breaks, Unit Roots, and Cointegration: A Further Test of the Sustainability of the Indian Fiscal Deficit," Public Finance Review, , vol. 32(2), pages 196-219, March.
    11. Salah Eddine Sari Hassoun & Khayereddine Salim Adda & Asma Hadjira Sebbane, 2021. "Examining the connection among national tourism expenditure and economic growth in Algeria," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    12. Alexeev, Vitali & Maynard, Alex, 2012. "Localized level crossing random walk test robust to the presence of structural breaks," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3322-3344.
    13. Darne, Olivier & Diebolt, Claude, 2004. "Unit roots and infrequent large shocks: new international evidence on output," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1449-1465, October.
    14. Hayashi, Naotsugu, 2005. "Structural changes and unit roots in Japan's macroeconomic time series: is real business cycle theory supported?," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 239-259, April.
    15. Chen, Shyh-Wei & Hsu, Chi-Sheng, 2016. "Threshold, smooth transition and mean reversion in inflation: New evidence from European countries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 23-36.
    16. Monojit Chatterji & Homagni Choudhury, 2010. "The Changing Inter-Industry Wage Structure of the Organised Manufacturing Sector in India, 1973-74 to 2003-04," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 244, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    17. Joseph V. Balagtas & Matthew T. Holt, 2009. "The Commodity Terms of Trade, Unit Roots, and Nonlinear Alternatives: A Smooth Transition Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 87-105.
    18. Chien-Chiang Lee & Chun-Ping Chang & Pei-Fen Chen, 2008. "Do CO2 emission levels converge among 21 OECD countries? New evidence from unit root structural break tests," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(7), pages 551-556.
    19. repec:idn:journl:v:1:y:2019:i:sp1:p:1-26 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Gao Lu Zou & Kwong Wing Chau, 2015. "Determinants and Sustainability of House Prices: The Case of Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-25, April.
    21. Dan Ben-David & David H. Papell, 1994. "The Great Wars, The Great Crash, and the Unit Root Hypothesis: Some New Evidence About an Old Stylized Fact," NBER Working Papers 4752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Kumar Narayan, Paresh & Smyth, Russell, 2007. "Are shocks to energy consumption permanent or temporary? Evidence from 182 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 333-341, January.

    More about this item

    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:taf:applec:v:33:y:2001:i:2:p:237-247. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.