chapter 1. linear panel models and heterogeneity types of restrictions can be imposed ... an...
Post on 17-Apr-2018
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Chapter 1. Linear Panel Models and Heterogeneity
School of Economics and Management - University of Geneva
Christophe Hurlin, Université of Orléans
University of Orléans
February 2018
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 1 / 258
Introduction
The outline of this chapter is the following:
Section 1: Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Section 2: Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Section 3: Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Section 4: Random e¤ects estimation methods
Section 5: Speci�cation tests: random or �xed e¤ects?
Subsection 5.1: The Mundlak�s speci�cation
Subsection 5.2: The Hausman�s test
Section 6: Heterogeneous panel data models
Subsection 6.1: Random coe¢ cient models
Subsection 6.2: Other heterogeneous models
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 2 / 258
Section 1
Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 3 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Objectives
1 De�ne the concept of homogeneous panel data model.
2 De�ne the concept of heterogeneous panel data model.
3 De�ne the concept of individual (unobserved) e¤ects.
4 Introduce the speci�cation tests (Hsiao, 2003).
5 Propose an empirical application for the strike days in OECD.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 4 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Notations
Let us consider the following linear model
yit = αit + β0itxit + εit
8 i = 1, .., n, 8 t = 1, ..,T
αit is a scalar that varies across i and t.
βit = (β1it , β2it , ..., βKit )0 is a K � 1 vector of parameters that vary
across i and t,
xit = (x1it , ..., xKit )0 is a K � 1 vector of exogenous variables,
εit is an error term.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 5 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Di¤erentrestrictions on the regression coe¢ cients can be tested:
1 the homogeneity of regression slope coe¢ cients
2 the homogeneity of regression intercept coe¢ cients
3 the time stability of parameters (slopes and constants). We will notconsider this issue here (since it is not speci�c to panel data models).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 6 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Fact (Time stability)
We assume that the parameters are constant over time (no structuralbreak, no regime switching, etc.), but can vary across individuals.
yit = αi + β0ixit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 7 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Three types of restrictions can be imposed on this model.
1 Regression slope coe¢ cients are identical, and intercepts are not(model with individual / unobserved e¤ects).
yit = αi + β0xit + εit
2 Regression intercepts are the same, and slope coe¢ cients are not(unusual).
yit = α+ β0ixit + εit
3 Both slope and intercept coe¢ cients are the same (homogeneous /pooled panel).
yit = α+ β0xit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 8 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (Heterogeneous panel data model)An heterogeneous panel data model is a model in which all parameters(constant and slope coe¢ cients) vary accross individuals.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 9 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (Homogeneous panel data model)
An homogeneous panel data model (or pooled model) is a model inwhich all parameters (constant and slope coe¢ cients) are common
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 10 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (individual e¤ects)
In a panel data model, the individual (unobserved) e¤ects are capturedby the constant terms αi .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 11 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
How to choose the appropriate speci�cation of the panel data model?
Economic interpretation: is it plausible to assume the homogeneityof the parameters across individuals?
Speci�cation tests: testing strategy proposed by Hsiao (2003) forinstance.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 12 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Speci�cation Tests
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 13 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 14 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Lemma (Normality assumption)Under the assumption that the εit are independently normally distributedover i and t with mean zero and variance σ2ε :
εiti .i .d .� N
�0, σ2ε
�di¤erent Fisher F -tests can be used to test the restrictions on β and α.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 15 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
First step (homogeneous/ pooled assumption)
Let us consider the general model
yit = αi + β0xit + εit
The hypothesis of common intercept and slope can be viewed as a set of(K + 1)(n� 1) linear restrictions:
H10 : βi = β αi = α 8 i 2 f1, ..., ng
H1a : 9 (i , j) 2 f1, ..., ng2 / βi 6= βj or αi 6= αj
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 16 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Consider the modelyit = αi + β0xit + εit
H10 : βi = β αi = α 8 i 2 f1, ..., ng
Under the alternative H1, there are nK estimated slope coe¢ cientsfor the n vectors βi (K � 1) and n estimated constants.
Under H1, the unrestricted residual sum of squares S1 divided by σ2εhas a chi-square distribution with nT � n (K + 1) degrees of freedom.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 17 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (Homogeneity test)
Under the homogeneous assumption H10 ,
H10 : βi(K ,1)
= β(K ,1)
αi = α 8 i 2 f1, ..., ng
the F statistic, denoted F1,and de�ned by:
F1 =(RSS1,c � RSS1) / [(n� 1) (K + 1)]
RSS1/ [nT � n (K + 1)]
has a Fischer distribution with (n� 1) (K + 1) and nT � n (K + 1)degrees of freedom. RSS1 denotes the residual sum of squares of themodel and RSS1,c the residual sum of squares of the constrained model
yit = α+ β0xit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 18 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Remark 1
Under H1, the residual sum of squares is equal to the sum of the n residualsum of squares associated to the n individual regressions:
RSS1 =n
∑i=1RSS1,i =
n
∑i=1
bε2it = n
∑i=1
�Syy ,i � S 0xy ,iS�1xx ,iSxy ,i
�
Syy ,i =T
∑t=1(yit � y i )2 with x i =
1T
T
∑t=1xit and y i =
1T
T
∑t=1yit
Sxx ,i =T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0 Sxy ,i =
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 19 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Remark 2
Under H10 , the model becomes:
yit = α+ β0xit + εit
The least-squares regression of the pooled model yields parameterestimates bβ = S�1xx Sxy
Sxx =n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x) (xit � x)0 with x =
1nT
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1xit
Sxy =n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x) (yit � y) with y =
1nT
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1yit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 20 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Under H10 , the overall RSS is de�ned by
SCR1,c = Syy � S 0xyS�1xx Sxy
with
Syy =n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(yit � y i )2
Sxx ,i =n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0
Sxy ,i =n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 21 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Second step (individual/unobserved e¤ects)
Let us consider the general model
yit = αi + β0ixit + εit
The hypothesis of heterogeneous intercepts but homogeneous slopes canbe reformulated as subject to (n� 1)K linear restrictions (no restrictionson αi ).
H20 : βi = β 8 i = 1, ..n
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 22 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (Test for common slope parameters)
Under the assumption H20 ,
H20 : βi = β 8 i = 1, ..n
the F statistic, denoted F2, and de�ned by:
F2 =(RSS1,c 0 � RSS1) / [(n� 1)K ]RSS1/ [nT � n (K + 1)]
has a Fischer distribution with (n� 1)K et nT � n (K + 1) degrees offreedom under H20 . RSS1 denotes the residual sum of squares of the modeland RSS1,c 0 the residual sum of squares of the constrained model (modelwith individual e¤ects):
yit = αi + β0xit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 23 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Under H20 , the residual sum of squares is:
RSS1,c 0 =n
∑i=1Syy ,i �
n
∑i=1Sxy ,i
!0 n
∑i=1Sxx ,i
!�1 n
∑i=1Sxy ,i
!
Syy ,i =T
∑t=1(yit � y i )2 with x i =
1T
T
∑t=1xit y i =
1T
T
∑t=1yit
Sxx ,i =T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0
Sxy ,i =T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 24 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Third step: homogeneous constants
If H20 is not rejected, one can also apply a conditional test forhomogeneous intercepts (n� 1 linear restrictions).
H30 : αi = α 8 i = 1, .., n given βi = β
Under the null, the model is homogeneous (pooled) and the restrictedresidual sum of squares is SCR1,c .
Under the alternative, the model is yit = αi + β0xit + εit , and there isnT �K � n degrees of freedom
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 25 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
De�nition (Test for homogeneous constant terms)
Under the assumption H30 ,
H30 : αi = α 8 i = 1, .., n given βi = β
the F statistic, denoted F3, and de�ned by:
F3 =(RSS1,c � RSS1,c 0) / (n� 1)RSS1,c 0/ [n (T � 1)�K ]
(1)
has a Fischer distribution with n� 1 and n (T � 1)�K degrees offreedom under H20 . RSS1,c 0 denotes the residual sum of squares of themodel with individual e¤ects and SCR1,c the residual sum of squares ofthe pooled model previously de�ned.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 26 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Application: Strikes in OECD
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 27 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Example (strikes in OECD countries)Let us consider a simple panel regression model for the total number ofstrike days in OECD countries. We consider a balanced panel data set for17 countries (n = 17) and annual data form 1951 to 1985 (T = 35).General idea: evaluate the link between strikes and some macroeconomicfactors (in�ation, unemployment, etc..).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 28 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
We consider the following model
sit = αi + βiuit + γipit + εit
sit the number of strike days for 1,000 workers for the country i attime t.
uit the unemployment rate
pit the in�ation rate
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 29 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 30 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Recall that, we have:yit = αi + β0xit + εit
H10 : βi = β αi = α 8 i 2 f1, ..., ngThe test statistic satis�es
F1 �H 10F (48, 544)
since(n� 1) (K + 1) = (17� 1)� (2+ 1) = 48nT � n (K + 1) = 595� 17� (2+ 1) = 544
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 31 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 32 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
For the second test:H20 : βi = β 8 i = 1, ..n
the F statistic, denoted F2, has the following distribution
F2 �H 10F (32, 544)
since(n� 1)K = (17� 1)� 2 = 32
nT � n (K + 1) = 595� 17� (2+ 1) = 544
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 33 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
For the third test:
H30 : αi = α 8 i = 1, .., n given βi = β
the F statistic, denoted F3, satis�es:
F3 �H 10F (16, 576)
since(n� 1) = 17� 1 = 16
n (T � 1)�K = 17� (35� 1)� 2 = 576
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 34 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Should we use these speci�cation tests?
These heterogeneity / homogeneity tests of the parameters are validunder speci�c assumptions (normality of residuals).
More generally, the assumption of heterogeneity / homogeneity of theparameters (slope coe¢ cients and constants) has to be evaluatedthrough an economic reasoning.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 35 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
ExampleIt is reasonnable to assume that the slope parameters of the productionfunction are the same accros countries? what does it imply? Should Iimpose a common mean for the TFP for France and Germany? Theanswer is probably no.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 36 / 258
1. Speci�cation tests and analysis of covariance
Key Concepts Section 1
1 Heterogeneous panel data model
2 Homogeneous panel data model
3 Individual (unobserved) e¤ects
4 Speci�cation tests (Hsiao, 2003)
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 37 / 258
Section 2
Linear Unobserved E¤ects Panel Data Models
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 38 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Objectives
1 De�ne the concept of linear unobserved e¤ects panel data model.
2 De�ne the concept of individual e¤ect.
3 Write the linear model in a vectorial form.
4 De�ne the notion of �xed e¤ects.
5 De�ne the notion of random e¤ects.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 39 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (linear unobserved e¤ects panel data model)
A linear unobserved (individual) e¤ects panel data model is de�ned as:
yit = αi + β0xit + εit
where αi is a scalar, β = (β1, β2, ..., βK )0 denotes a K � 1 vector of
parameters, xit = (x1it , ..., xKit )0 is a K � 1 vector of exogenous variables,and εit is an error term, assumed to be i .i .d ., with 8 i = 1, .., n,8 t = 1, ..,T
E (εit ) = 0 E�ε2it�= σ2ε
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 40 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (individual e¤ects)
There are many names for the scalars αi , i = 1, ..., n: (1) unobservede¤ects, (2) individual e¤ects, (3) unobserved components, and (4)latent variables (for random e¤ects models).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 41 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (error terms)The errors εit are called the idiosyncratic errors or idiosyncraticdisturbances. They change accross t as well as accross i .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 42 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Vectorial form (1)
Let us denote
yi(T ,1)
=
0BB@yi ,1yi ,2...yit
1CCA Xi(T ,K )
=
0BB@x1,i ,1 x2,i ,1 ... xK ,i ,1x1,i ,2 x2,i ,2 ... xK ,i ,2... ... ... ...x1,it x2,it ... xK ,it
1CCALet us denote e a unit vector and εi the vector of errors:
e(T ,1)
=
0BB@11...1
1CCA εi(T ,1)
=
0BB@εi ,1εi ,2...εit
1CCA β(K ,1)
=
0BB@β1β2...βK
1CCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 43 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (vectorial form)
For any individual 8 i = 1, ..., n, the linear unobserved e¤ects paneldata model can be de�ned as follows:
yi = eαi + Xi β+ εi
E (εi ) = 0
E�εi ε0i
�= σ2ε IT
E�εi ε0j
�= 0(T ,T )
if i 6= j
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 44 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Example (production function)Let us consider the case of a Cobb Douglas production function in log, asde�ned previously, for the case T = 3 and K = 2. We have:
yit = αi + βkkit + βnnit + εit 8 i , 8 t 2 f1, 2, 3g
or in a vectorial form for a country i as:
yi(3,1)
= e(3,1)
αi(1,1)
+ Xi(3,2)
β(2,1)
+ εi(3,1)0@ yi ,1
yi ,2yi ,3
1A =
0@ 111
1A αi +
0@ ki ,1 ni ,1ki ,2 ni ,2ki ,3 ni ,3
1A� βkβn
�+
0@ εi ,1εi ,2εi ,3
1A
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 45 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Vectorial form (2)
It is also possible to stackle all these vectors/matrices as follows
Y = eeeα+ X β+ ε
Y(Tn,1)
=
0BB@y1y2...yn
1CCA X(Tn,K )
=
0BB@X1X2...Xn
1CCA ε(Tn,1)
=
0BB@ε1ε2...εn
1CCAwhere 0T is the null vector (T , 1) .
ee(Tn,n)
= In e =
0BB@e 0T ... 0T0T e ... 0T... ... ... 0T0T 0T ... e
1CCA eα(n,1)
=
0BB@α1α2...αn
1CCAC. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 46 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Example (production function)Consider the case of the production function with T = 3 and n = 2
Y = eeeα+ X β+ ε0BBBBBBB@
y1,1y1,2y1,3y2,1y2,2y2,3
1CCCCCCCA=
0BBBBBB@
1 01 01 00 10 10 1
1CCCCCCA�
α1α2
�+
0BBBBBBB@
k11 n11k12 n12k13 n13
k21 n21k22 n22k,3 n23
1CCCCCCCA�
βkβn
�+
0BBBBBBB@
ε11ε12ε1,3
ε2,1ε2,2ε2,3
1CCCCCCCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 47 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Especially in methodological papers, but also in applications, one oftensees a discussion about whether the individual e¤ects αi have to be treatedas a random e¤ect or a �xed e¤ect.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 48 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (Traditional approach)In the traditional approach to panel data models, αi is called a �randome¤ect�when it is treated as a random variable and a ��xed e¤ect�whenit is treated as a parameter to be estimated for each cross sectionobservation i .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 49 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Discussion
For Wooldridge (2010), these discussions about whether the αi shouldbe treated as random variables or as parameters to be estimated arewrongheaded for microeconomic panels.
With a large number of random draws from the cross section, italmost always makes sense to treat the unobserved e¤ects, αi ,as random draws from the population, along with yit and xit .
This approach is certainly appropriate from an omitted variables orneglected heterogeneity perspective.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 50 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Fact (Mundlak�s approach)
As suggested by Mundlak (1978), the key issue involving αi is whether ornot it is uncorrelated with the observed explanatory variables xit .
Mundlak Y. (1978), �On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross SectionData�, Econometrica, 46, 69-85
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 51 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (a "modern" approach)In a modern approach, �random e¤ect� is synonymous with zerocorrelation between the observed explanatory variables and theunobserved (random) e¤ect αi :
cov (xit , αi ) = 0, 8t, 8i
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 52 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Remarks
Actually, a stronger conditional mean independence assumption,
E (αi j xi1, ..., xiT ) = 0
is needed to fully justify statistical inference.
In applied papers, when αi is referred to an �individual randome¤ect,� then αi is probably being assumed to be uncorrelated with thexit .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 53 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (Fixed e¤ects)In microeconometric applications, the term ��xed e¤ect�does notusually mean that αi is being treated as nonrandom; rather, it means thatone is allowing for arbitrary correlation between the unobserved e¤ect αiand the observed explanatory variables xit .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 54 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Remarks
Wooldridge (2010) avoids referring to αi as a random e¤ect or a �xede¤ect. Instead, he refers to αi as unobserved e¤ect, unobservedheterogeneity, and so on.
Nevertheless, later we will label two di¤erent estimation methods asrandom e¤ects estimation and �xed e¤ects estimation methods.
This terminology is so ingrained that it is pointless to try to change itnow.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 55 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Fixed or random e¤ects?
The economic interpretation of the individual e¤ects generally allowsto show that they are probably correlated to the explanatoryvariables.
But, in case of doubt, it is possible to use a speci�cation test(Hausman�s test, 1978)
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 56 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Example (Production function)Let us consider the simple example of the Cobb Douglass productionfunction.
yit = βikit + γinit + αi + vit
In this case, αi corresponds to the unobserved e¤ect on TFP due toscountry speci�c omitted factor (climate, institutions, organization, etc..).In this case, we might expect that the the level of factors are positivilycorrelated with this component of TFP: the more a country is productive,the more it invests in capital for instance.
cov (αi , kit ) > 0 cov (αi , nit ) > 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 57 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Example (Patents and R&D)
Hausman, Hall, and Griliches (1984) estimate (nonlinear) distributed lagmodels to study the relationship between patents awarded to a �rm andcurrent and past levels of R&D spending. A linear version of their model is:
patentsit = θt + zitγ+ δ0RDit + δ1RDit�1 + ..+ δ5RDit�5 + αi + vit
where RDit is spending on R&D for �rm i at time t and zit contains otherexplanatory variables. αi is a �rm heterogeneity term that may in�uencepatentsit and that may be correlated with current, past, and future R&Dexpenditures.
cov (αi ,RDit�k ) 6= 0 8k
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 58 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
De�nition (Hausman�s test)
The Hausman test (1978), is a test of the null hypothesis
cov (xit , αi ) = 0, 8 (it)
and is generally presented as a speci�cation test (�xed or random) forthe unobserved e¤ects.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 59 / 258
2. Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data models
Key Concepts Section 2
1 Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data model.
2 Vectorial form of the linear panel data model
3 Individual e¤ects.
4 Unobserved e¤ects
5 Random e¤ects.
6 Fixed e¤ects.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 60 / 258
Section 3
Fixed E¤ects Estimation Methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 61 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Objectives
1 Specify the linear regression model with �xed e¤ects.
2 Introduce the LSDV (within) estimator.
3 De�ne the within transformation.
4 Estimate the slope parameters.
5 Estimate the �xed e¤ects.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 62 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Notations
Let us denote
yi(T ,1)
=
0BB@yi ,1yi ,2...yit
1CCA Xi(T ,K )
=
0BB@x1,i ,1 x2,i ,1 ... xK ,i ,1x1,i ,2 x2,i ,2 ... xK ,i ,2... ... ... ...x1,it x2,it ... xK ,it
1CCALet us denote e a unit vector and εi the vector of errors:
e(T ,1)
=
0BB@11...1
1CCA εi(T ,1)
=
0BB@εi ,1εi ,2...εit
1CCA β(K ,1)
=
0BB@β1β2...βK
1CCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 63 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
We consider the �xed e¤ects model:
yi = eαi + Xi β+ εi 8 i = 1, .., n
where αi is assumed to be a constant term or a random variablesatisfying E (αi j xi1, ..., xiT ) = 0.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 64 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Assumptions (H1) The errors terms εit are i .i .d . 8 (it) with:E (εit ) = 0
E (εit εi ,s ) =
�σ2ε0
t = s8t 6= s , or E (εi ε0i ) = σ2ε IT where It denotes
the identity matrix (T ,T ) .
E (εit εj ,s ) = 0, 8j 6= i , 8 (t, s) , or E�
εi ε0j
�= 0 where 0 denotes the
null matrix (T ,T ) .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 65 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
TheoremUnder assumptions H1, the ordinary-least-squares (OLS) estimator of β isthe best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 66 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (LSDV estimator)
In this context, the OLS estimator bβ is called the least-squaresdummy-variable (LSDV) or Fixed E¤ect (FE) estimator, because theobserved values of the variable for the coe¢ cient αi takes the form ofdummy variables.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 67 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
The OLS estimators of αi and β and are obtained by minimizingnbαi , bβLSDV o = argminfαi ,βgni=1
n
∑i=1
ε0i εi
=n
∑i=1(yi � eαi � Xi β)0 (yi � eαi � Xi β)
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 68 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
FOC1 (with respect to αi ) gives:
bαi = y i � bβ0LSDV x iwith
x i =1T
T
∑t=1xit y i =
1T
T
∑t=1yit
Given the second FOC (with respect to β) and the previous result, we canderive the formula for bβLSDV .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 69 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (LSDV estimator)
Under assumption H1, the �xed e¤ect estimator or LSDV estimator of βis de�ned by:
bβLSDV =
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0
!�1
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 70 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Remarks
1 The computational procedure for estimating the slope parameters inthis model does not require that the dummy variables for theindividual (and/or time) e¤ects actually be included in the matrix ofexplanatory variables.
2 We only need (1) the empirical means of time-series observationsseparately for each cross-sectional unit, (2) transform theobserved variables by subtracting out these means, and (3) then applythe least squares method to the transformed data.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 71 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
The foregoing procedure is equivalent to premultiplying the i th equation
yi = eαi + Xi β+ εi
by a T � T idempotent (covariance) transformation matrix (withinoperator)
Q = IT �1Tee 0
to �sweep out� the individual e¤ect αi so that individual observations aremeasured as deviations from individual means (over time).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 72 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Q(T ,T )
= IT �1Tee 0 =
0BBBBBB@
1� 1T � 1
T ... � 1T � 1
T
� 1T 1� 1
T ... � 1T � 1
T
.... .... ... ... ...
� 1T � 1
T ... 1� 1T � 1
T
� 1T � 1
T ... � 1T 1� 1
T
1CCCCCCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 73 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Qyi and QXi correspond to the observations are measured as deviationsfrom individual means :
Qyi =
�IT �
1Tee 0�yi
= yi � e�1Te 0yi
�
=
0BB@yi ,1yi ,2...yit
1CCA� 1T
T
∑t=1yit
!0BB@11...1
1CCA= yi � y ie
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 74 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
QXi = Xi �1Tee 0Xi
=
0BB@x1,i ,1 x2,i ,1 ... xK ,i ,1x1,i ,2 x2,i ,2 ... xK ,i ,2... ... ... ...x1,it x2,it ... xK ,it
1CCA
� 1T
0BB@11...1
1CCA� ∑Tt=1 x1,it ∑T
t=1 x2,it ... ∑Tt=1 xK ,it
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 75 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Finally, when the transformation Q is applied to a vector of constant (or atime invariant variable), it lead to a null vector.
Qe =
�IT �
1Tee 0�e
= e � 1Tee 0e
= e � e = 0
since
e 0e =�1 .. 1
�0@ 1..1
1A = T
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 76 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
So, we have:yi = eαi + Xi β+ εi
() Qyi = Qeαi +QXi β+Qεi
() Qyi = QXi β+Qεi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 77 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (Within - LSDV estimator)Under assumption H1, the �xed e¤ect estimator or LSDV estimator orWithin estimator of parameter β is de�ned by:
bβLSDV =
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi
!�1 n
∑i=1X 0i Qyi
!
whereQ = IT �
1Tee 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 78 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Fact (Time-invariant regressors)If the explanatory variables contain some time-invariant variables zi , theircoe¢ cients cannot be estimated by LSDV, because the covariancetransformation eliminates zi .
Qzi =�IT �
1Tee 0�zi = zi �
1Tee 0zi = zi � z ie = 0T
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 79 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
ExampleLet us consider a simple panel regression model for the total number ofstrike days in OECD countries. We have a balanced panel data set for 17countries (n = 17) and annual data form 1951 to 1985 (T = 35). Generalidea: evaluate the link between strikes and some macroeconomic factors(in�ation, unemployment etc..)
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 80 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
We consider the following model
sit = αi + βiuit + γipit + εit
sit the number of strike days for 1000 workers for the country i attime t.
uit the unemployement rate
pit the in�ation rate
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 81 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 82 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 83 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Theorem
The LSDV estimator bβ is unbiased and consistent when either n, or T , orboth tend to in�nity. bβLSDV p�!
nT!∞β
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 84 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
TheoremThe estimator for the unobserved e¤ects bαi , although unbiased, isconsistent only when T ! ∞.
bαi p�!T!∞
αi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 85 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Theorem
The asymptotic variance�covariance matrix of the LSDV estimator bβ isgiven by:
V�bβLSDV � = σ2ε
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi
!�1
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 86 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Estimator of the asymptotic covariance matrix
bV �bβLSDV � = bσ2ε
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi
!�1with bσ2ε = 1
nT �K � nn
∑i=1
T
∑t=1bε2it
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 87 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
bσ2ε =1
nT �K � nn
∑i=1
T
∑t=1bε2it
=1
595� 2� 17 � 0.146958e09
= 505.1093
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 88 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Be careful with a simple OLSmethod!
bσ2ε =1
nT �Kn
∑i=1
T
∑t=1bε2it
=1
595� 2 � 0.146958e09
= 497.8165
as it does not take intoaccount the correct number ofconstant terms.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 89 / 258
3. Fixed e¤ects estimation methods
Key Concepts Section 3
1 Linear unobserved e¤ects panel data model.
2 Fixed e¤ects and assumptions H1.
3 LSDV or within estimator.
4 Within transformation
5 Properties of the LSDV estimator.
6 Asymptotic variance-covariance of the LSDV estimator.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 90 / 258
Section 4
Random E¤ects Estimation Methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 91 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Objectives
1 Specify the error-component model.
2 De�ne the Generalized Least Squares (GLS) estimator.
3 De�ne the between and pooled estimators.
4 Write the GLS estimator as a weigthed average of the LSDV andbetween estimators.
5 Study the properties of the GLS estimator..
6 De�ne the feasible GLS estimator.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 92 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (error-component model)The random speci�cation of unobserved e¤ects corresponds to a particularcase of variance-component or error-component model, in which theerror is assumed to consist of three components
yit = β0xit + εit 8 (it)
εit = αi + λt + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 93 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Terminologyεit = αi + λt + vit
αi : individual (random) e¤ect
λt : time (random) e¤ect
vit : idiosyncratic error term
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 94 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Assumptions (H2) The errors terms εit = αi + λt + vit are i .i .d . 8 (it)with:
E (αi ) = E (λt ) = E (vit ) = 0
E (αiλt ) = E (λtvit ) = E (αivit ) = 0
E (αiαj ) =
�σ2α0
i = j8i 6= j
E (λtλs ) =
�σ2λ0
t = s8t 6= s
E (vitvj ,s ) =�
σ2v0
t = s, i = j8t 6= s, 8i 6= j
E (αix 0it ) = E (λtx 0it ) = E (vitx 0it ) = 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 95 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Remark
As suggested by Wooldridge (2001), the "�xed e¤ect" speci�cation can beviewed as a case in which αi is a random parameter with
cov�αi , x 0it
�6= 0
whereas the "random e¤ect model" correspond to the situation in which
cov�αi , x 0it
�= 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 96 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (error-component model)Under H2, the variance of yit conditional on xit is equal to:
σ2y jx = σ2ε = σ2α + σ2λ + σ2v
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 97 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (centered individual e¤ects)
If the individual e¤ects α�i are supposed to have a non zero mean, with
E (αi ) = µ
then we can de�ned individual e¤ects αi = µ+ α�i with zero mean. Theerror-component model is then de�ned as:
yit = µ+ β0xit + εit
εit = α�i + λt + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 98 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Random coe¢ cient model
In the sequel, for simplicity we do not introduce any time e¤ects andconsider a simple random e¤ect model with
εit = αi + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 99 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Vectorial form
The vectorial expression of the individual e¤ects model is then de�ned as:
yi(T ,1)
= eXi(T ,K+1)
γ(K+1,1)
+ εi(T ,1)
εi(T ,1)
= e(T ,1)
αi(1,1)
+ vi(T ,1)
eXi = (e : Xi ) and γ0 =�µ : β0
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 100 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (variance-covariance matrix of errors)Under assumptions H2, the variance-covariance matrix of εi is equal to:
V = E�εi ε0i
�= E
�(αie + vi ) (αie + vi )
0� = σ2αee0 + σ2v IT
Its inverse is:
V�1 =1
σ2v
�IT �
�σ2α
σ2v + Tσ2α
�ee 0�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 101 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Remark
The presence of αi produces a correlation among errors of the samecross-sectional unit (autocorrelation) as
V = E�εi ε0i
�= σ2αee
0 + σ2v IT
V(T ,T )
=
0BBBB@σ2α + σ2v σ2α ... σ2α
σ2α + σ2v ... σ2α
... σ2α
σ2α + σ2v
1CCCCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 102 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Remark
If we consider the nT � 1 vector of errors ε = (ε01, ..., ε0n)0 , we have
V (ε) = E�εε0�= V In
V (ε)(nT ,nT )
=
0BBBBBB@
V(T ,T )
0(T ,T )
... 0(T ,T )
V(T ,T )
... 0(T ,T )
... 0(T ,T )
V(T ,T )
1CCCCCCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 103 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Within transformation
Regardless of whether the αi are treated as �xed or as random, theindividual-speci�c e¤ects for a given sample can be swept out by theidempotent (covariance) transformation matrix Q
Qyi = Qeµ+QXi β+Qeαi +Qvi
Since Qe =�IT � T�1ee 0
�e = 0, we have
Qyi = QXi β+Qvi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 104 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
TheoremUnder assumptions H2, when αi are treated as random, the LSDVestimator is unbiased and consistent either n, or T , or both tend toin�nity. However, whereas the LSDV is the BLUE under the assumptionthat αi are �xed constants, it is not the BLUE when αi are assumedrandom. The BLUE in the latter case is the Generalized-Least-Squares(GLS) estimator.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 105 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Summary
Assumptions LSDV GLS
H2 +E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) = 0 Unbiased BLUE
H2 +E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) 6= 0 BLUE Biased
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 106 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Notations
Let us consider the model
yi = eXiγ+ εi 8 i = 1, .., n
where εi = αie + vi , eXi = (e : Xi ) and γ0 =�µ : β0
�.
We assume that the variance covariance matrix V = E (εi ε0i ) isknown.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 107 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (GLS estimator)If the variance covariance matrix V is known, the GLS estimator of theγ vector, denoted bγGLS , is de�ned by:
bγGLS =
n
∑i=1
eX 0i V�1 eXi!�1 n
∑i=1
eX 0i V�1yi!
Under assumptions H2, this estimaor is BLUE.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 108 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (inverse of the variance-covariance matrix)
Following Maddala (1971), we can write V�1 as:
V�1 =1
σ2v
�Q + ψ
1Tee 0�
where Q = (IT � ee 0/T ) and where the parameter ψ is de�ned by:
ψ =
�σ2v
σ2v + Tσ2α
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 109 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Proof
V�1V =1
σ2v
�Q + ψ
1Tee 0� �
σ2αee0 + σ2v IT
�=
1σ2v
�σ2αQee
0 + σ2vQ + ψσ2αTee 0ee 0 + ψ
σ2vTee 0�
=1
σ2v
�σ2vQ + ψσ2αee
0 + ψσ2vTee 0�
as e 0e = T
=1
σ2v
�σ2vQ +
1Tee 0ψ
�Tσ2α + σ2v
��= IT �
1Tee 0 +
1Tee 0ψ
�Tσ2α + σ2v
σ2v
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 110 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Proof (ct�d)
V�1V = IT �1Tee 0 +
1Tee 0ψ
�Tσ2α + σ2v
σ2v
�Since
ψ =
�σ2v
σ2v + Tσ2α
�we have
V�1V = IT �1Tee 0 +
1Tee 0 = IT �
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 111 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Given this de�nition of V�1, we have:
bγGLS =
n
∑i=1
eX 0i �Q + ψ1Tee 0� eXi
!�1 n
∑i=1
eX 0i �Q + ψ1Tee 0�yi
!
=
n
∑i=1
eX 0i Q eXi + ψ1T
n
∑i=1
eX 0i ee 0 eXi!�1 n
∑i=1
eX 0i Qyi + ψ1T
n
∑i=1
eX 0i ee 0yi!
with eXi = (e Xi ) and γ0 =�µ β0
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 112 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
It is possible to show that
� bµGLSbβGLS�
=
0B@ ψnT ψTn∑i=1x0i
ψTn∑i=1x i
n∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n∑i=1x ix
0i
1CA�1
0@ ψnTyn∑i=1X 0i Qyi + ψT
n∑i=1x iy i
1AUsing the formula of the partitioned inverse, we can derive bβGLS .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 113 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (GLS estimator)
If the variance covariance matrix V is known, the GLS estimator of β is:
bβGLS =
1T
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψ
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 1T
n
∑i=1X 0i Qyi + ψ
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!
with ψ=σ2v�σ2v + Tσ2α
��1
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 114 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
The GLS estimator can be expressed as a weigthed average of the LSDV(OLS) estimator and the between estimator:
bβGLS =
1T
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψ
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 1T
n
∑i=1X 0i Qyi + ψ
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 115 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (between group estimator)
The between-group estimator or between estimator bβBE corresponds tothe OLS estimator obtained in the model:
y i = c + β0x i + εi 8 i = 1, .., n
bβBE =
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!The estimator bβBE is called the between-group estimator because itignores variation within the group
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 116 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (pooled estimator)
The pooled estimator bβpooled corresponds to the OLS estimator obtainedin the pooled model:
yit = α+ β0xit + εit 8 i = 1, .., n 8 t = 1, ..,T
bβpooled =
T
∑t=1
n
∑i=1(xit � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
T
∑t=1
n
∑i=1(xit � x) (yit � y)
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 117 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Theorem
Under assumptions H2, the GLS estimator bβGLS is a weighted average ofthe between-group bβBE and the within-group (LSDV) estimators bβLSDV .bβGLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDVwhere ∆ denotes a weigth matrix de�ned by:
∆ = ψT
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 118 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
GLS estimator properties
1 If ψ ! 0, the GLS estimator converges to LSDV estimator.
bβGLS p�!ψ!0
bβLSDV2 If ψ ! 1, then GLS converges to the OLS pooled estimator.
bβGLS p�!ψ!1
bβpooled
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 119 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methodsProof: case 1 bβGLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDV
∆ = ψT
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!
Consider the case ψ = 0 then
∆ = 0 bβGLS = bβLSDVSo, if ψ ! 0, the GLS estimator converges to LSDV estimator.
bβGLS p�!ψ!0
bβLSDVC. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 120 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Proof: case 2 bβGLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDVConsider the case ψ = 1 we have
∆ = T
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + T
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!
bβBE =
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!
bβLSDV =
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0
!�1 n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 121 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Proof: case 2
bβGLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDV= T
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + T
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!
+
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (xit � x i )0
!�1 n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
!
�T
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + T
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x i ) (yit � y i )
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 122 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Proof: case 2
So, if ψ = 1 we have
bβGLS =
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x) (xit � x)0
!�1
n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1(xit � x) (yit � y)
!= bβpooled
So, if ψ ! 1, the GLS estimator converges to the OLS pooled estimator.
bβGLS p�!ψ!1
bβpooledC. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 123 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
GLS estimator properties
The parameter ψ = σ2v�σ2v + Tσ2α
��1 measures the weight given to thebetween-group variation.
In the LSDV (or �xed-e¤ects model) procedure, this source ofvariation is completely ignored (ψ = 0).
The OLS procedure (pooled model) corresponds to ψ = 1. Thebetween-group and within-group variations are just added up.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 124 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
FactThe procedure of treating αi as random coe¢ cients provides anintermediate solution between treating them all as di¤erent (�xede¤ects, LSDV) and treating them all as equal (pooled model).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 125 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 126 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 127 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
GLS estimator properties
Given the de�nition of ψ, we have:
limT!∞
ψ = limT!∞
�σ2v
σ2v + Tσ2α
�= 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 128 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Theorem (GLS and LSDV)When T tends to in�nity, the GLS estimator converges to the LSDVestimator: bβGLS �!T!∞
bβLSDV
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 129 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Interpretation bβGLS �!T!∞bβLSDV
When T ! ∞, we have an in�nite number of observations for each i .
Therefore, we can consider each αi as a random variable which hasbeen drawn once and forever
For each i we assume that they are just like �xed parameters.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 130 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (Transformation matrix)Computation of the GLS estimator can be simpli�ed by introducing atransformation matrix P such that
P =�IT �
�1� ψ1/2
�(1/T ) ee 0
�We have
V�1 =1
σ2vP 0P
Premultiplying the model by the transformation matrix P, we obtain theGLS estimator by applying the least-squares method to the transformedmodel (Theil (1971, Chapter 6)).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 131 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Transformation matrix
The GLS estimator is equivalent to
1 Transforming the data by subtracting a fraction�1� ψ1/2� of
individual means y i and x i from their corresponding yit and xit
2 Regressing yit ��1� ψ1/2� y i on a constant and xit � �1� ψ1/2� x i
using simple OLS.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 132 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (Asymptotic variance covariance matrix)Under assumptions H2, the asymptotic variance covariance matrix ofthe GLS estimator is given by:
V�bβGLS� = σ2v
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 133 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Remark
V�bβGLS� = σ2v
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
V�bβLSDV � = σ2ε
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi
!�1As ψ > 0, the di¤erence between the covariance matrices of bβLSDV andbβGLS is a positive semide�nite matrix. For K = 1, we have:
V�bβGLS� � V
�bβLSDV �=> the LSDV is not BLUE
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 134 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
De�nition (feasible GLS)
If the variance components σ2ε and σ2α are unknown, we can use a two-stepGLS estimation procedure, called as feasible GLS.
1 In the �rst step, we estimate the variance components using someconsistent estimators.
2 In the second step, we substitute their estimated values into
bγGLS =
n
∑i=1
eX 0i bV�1 eXi!�1 n
∑i=1
eX 0i bV�1yi!
or its equivalent form.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 135 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Two-step GLS estimator
De�ne y i = αi + β0x i + εi and (yit � y i ) = (xit � x i ) + (vit � v i ), we canuse the within and between-group residuals to estimate σ2ε and σ2α by
bσ2v =n∑i=1
T∑t=1
�(yit � y i )� bβ0LSDV (xit � x i )�2
n (T � 1)�K
bσ2α =n∑i=1
�y i � bβ0LSDV x i�2n�K � 1 � bσ2v
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 136 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Then, we have an estimate of ψ and V�1
bψ = bσ2vbσ2v + Tbσ2αbV�1 = 1bσ2v
�Q + bψ 1
Tee 0�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 137 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
LemmaWhen the sample size is large (in the sense of either n! ∞,or T ! ∞),the two-step GLS estimator will have the same asymptotic e¢ ciency as theGLS procedure with known variance components.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 138 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
LemmaEven for moderate sample size (for T � 3, n� (K + 1) � 9; for T � 2,n� (K + 1) � 10), the two-step procedure is still more e¢ cient than theLSDV estimator in the sense that the di¤erence between the covariancematrices of the covariance estimator and the two-step estimator isnonnegative de�nite.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 139 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
ExampleLet us consider a simple panel regression model for the total number ofstrikes days in OECD countries. We have a balanced panel data set for 17countries (n = 17) and annual data form 1951 to 1985 (T = 35).
sit = αi + βuit + γpit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 140 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Figure: Random e¤ects method
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 141 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Here we have bσ2v = 0.25514e06 = 255, 140bσ2α = 55, 401bψ = bσ2vbσ2v + Tbσ2α = 255, 140
255, 140+ 35� 55, 401 = 0.1163
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 142 / 258
4. Random e¤ects estimation methods
Key Concepts Section 4
1 Error-component model.
2 GLS, Between and pooled estimators.
3 Write the GLS estimator as a weighted average.
4 Feasible GLS estimator.
5 Properties of the GLS estimator.
6 Asymptotic variance-covariance matrix of the GLS estimator.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 143 / 258
Section 5
Speci�cation tests: Fixed or Random e¤ects?
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 144 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
Objectives
1 De�ne the Mundlak�s speci�cation.
2 Discuss the independence assumption between random e¤ects andexplanatory variables.
3 Show that the GLS estimator may be not consistent when T is�xed.
4 Show that the GLS is always consistent when T tends to in�nity.
5 Introduce the Hausman�s lemma.
6 De�ne the Hausman�s speci�cation test.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 145 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
Fact (large T sample)Whether to treat the e¤ects as �xed or random makes no di¤erence whenT is large, because both the LSDV estimator and the generalizedleast-squares estimator become the same estimator:
bβGLS �!T!∞bβLSDV
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 146 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
Fixed or random e¤ects
When T is �nite and n is large, whether to treat the e¤ects as �xedor random is not an easy question to answer.
It can make a surprising amount of di¤erence in the estimates of theparameters.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 147 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
Example (Hausman, 1978)
Hausman (1978) estimates a wage equation using a sample of 629 highschool graduates followed over six years by the Michigan income dynamicsstudy. The explanatory variables include a piecewise-linear representationof age, the presence of unemployment or poor health in the previous year,and dummy variables for self-employment, living in the South, or living ina rural area.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 148 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 149 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
In the random-e¤ects framework, there are two fundamental assumptions.
1 One is that the unobserved individual e¤ects αi are random drawsfrom a common population.
2 The explanatory variables are strictly exogenous: it implies that allthe components of the error terms are orthogonal to theregressors:
E ( εit j xi1, .., xiK ) = E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) = E (vit j xi1, .., xiK ) = 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 150 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
What happens when this condition is violated?
E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) 6= 0 or E�αix 0it
�6= 0
1 The Mundlak�s speci�cation (1978)
2 The Hausman�s speci�cation test
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 151 / 258
Subsection 5.1
The Mundlak�s Speci�cation
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 152 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Mundlak�s speci�cation
Mundlak (1978) criticized the random-e¤ects formulation on thegrounds that it neglects the correlation that may exist between thee¤ects αi and the explanatory variables xit .
There are reasons to believe that in many circumstances αi and xitare indeed correlated.
Mundlak Y. (1978), �On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross SectionData�, Econometrica, 46, 69-85.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 153 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Mundlak�s speci�cation
The properties of various estimators we have discussed thus fardepend on the existence and extent of the relations between the X�sand the e¤ects αi .
Therefore, we have to consider the joint distribution of thesevariables. However, αi are unobservable.
Mundlak (1978) suggests to approximate E (αixit ) by a linearfunction.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 154 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
De�nition (Mundlak�s speci�cation)Let us assume that the individual e¤ects satisfy:
αi = x 0ia|{z}component proportional to x
+ α�i|{z}component orthogonal to x
with a 2 RK , x i = T�1 ∑Tt=1 xit the K � 1 vector of individual means of
the explanatory variables and
E�α�i x
0it
�= 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 155 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
De�nition (Mundlak�s speci�cation)With the Mundlak�s speci�cation, the unobserved e¤ects model becomes:
yit = µ+ β0xit + x 0ia+ εit
εit = α�i + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 156 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Assumption H3: The error term εit = α�i + vit are i .i .d . 8 (it) with:E (α�i ) = E (vit ) = 0
E (α�i vit ) = 0
E�
α�i α�j
�=
�σ2α�0
i = j8i 6= j
E (vitvj ,s ) =�
σ2v0
t = s, i = j8t 6= s, 8i 6= j
E (vitx 0it ) = E (α�i x0it ) = 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 157 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Mundlak�s speci�cation
The model can be rewritten as follows:
yi(T ,1)
= eX �i(T ,K+1)
γ(K+1,1)
+ εi(T ,1)
8 i = 1, .., n
withεi = α�i e + vieX �i = �ex 0i : e : Xi
�γ0 =
�a0 : µ : β0
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 158 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Mundlak�s speci�cation
The variance-covariance matrix of the error term is de�ned as:
E�εi ε0j
�= E
�(α�i e + vi )
�α�j e + vj
�0�=
�σ2α�ee
0 + σ2v IT = V�
0i = ji 6= j
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 159 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
GLS estimator
Utilizing the expression for the inverse of a partitioned matrix, we obtainthe GLS estimator of µ, β, and a as:
bµ�GLS = y � x 0bβBEbβ�GLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDVba�GLS = bβBE � bβLSDV
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 160 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Between estimator
The between estimator bβBE corresponds to the OLS estimator obtainedin the model:
y i = c + (β+ a)0 x i + εi = c + θ0x i + εi 8 i = 1, .., n
bθBE =
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1 n
∑i=1(x i � x) (y i � y)
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 161 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
GLS estimator properties
Under H3, the GLS estimator bβ�GLS is consistent (cf. section 4):bβ�GLS �!
nT!∞β
Besides, we have bβ�GLS �!T!∞bβLSDV
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 162 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Question: What is the consequence to neglect the dependence betweenαi and xit and to wrongly consider the following model?
yit = µ+ β0xit + εit
εit = αi + vit
αi = x 0ia+ α�i
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 163 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Let us assume that the DGP corresponds to the Mundlak�s model
αi = x 0ia+ α�i
and we apply GLS to the initial model:
yit = µ+ β0xit + εit
εit = αi + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 164 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
In general, we have:
bβGLS = ∆bβBE + (IK � ∆) bβLSDVIt is easy to show that: bβBE p�!
n!∞β+ a
bβLSDV p�!n!∞
β
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 165 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Let us assume that∆
p�!n!∞
∆
with
∆ = ψT
n
∑i=1X 0i QXi + ψT
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!�1
n
∑i=1(x i � x) (x i � x)0
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 166 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
When T is �xed and n tends to in�nity, the GLS is not consistent if thereis a correlation between individual e¤ects and the expanatory variables:
plimn!∞
bβGLS = ∆� plimn!∞
bβBE + �IK � ∆�� plimn!∞
bβLSDV= ∆� (β+ a) +
�IK � ∆
�� β (2)
= β+ ∆a
with∆ = plim
n!∞∆.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 167 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Theorem (GLS bias)
If αi = x 0ia+ α�i with a 6= 0,the GLS is not consistent when T is �xedand n tends to in�nity: bβGLS p�!
n!∞β+ ∆a
As usual, the GLS is consistent with T :
bβGLS p�!T!∞
β
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 168 / 258
5.1. Mundlak�s speci�cation
Summary
E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) = 0 E (αi j xi1, .., xiK ) 6= 0LSDV GLS LSDV GLS
T �xed, n! ∞ Consistent � Consistent Not Consistent
T ! ∞ and n! ∞ Consistent BLUE Consistent Consistent
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 169 / 258
Subsection 5.2
The Hausman�s Speci�cation Test
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 170 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Hausman (1978) proposes a general speci�cation test, that can beapplied in the speci�c context of linear panel models to the issue ofspeci�cation of individual e¤ects (�xed or random).
Hausman J.A., (1978) �Speci�cation Tests in Econometrics�, Econometrica,46, 1251-1271
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 171 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
General idea of the Hausman�s lemma
Let us consider a general model
y = f (x ; β) + ε
and particular hypothesis H0 on the parameters, error terms, etc.
Let us consider two estimators of the K -vector β, denoted bβ1 and bβ2,both consistent under H0 and asymptotically normally distributed.
Under H0, the estimator bβ1 reachs the asymptotic Cramer�Raobound.
Under H1, the estimator bβ2 is biased and not consistent.C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 172 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
General idea of the Hausman�s lemma
By examing the distance between bβ1 and bβ2, it is possible to concludeabout H0 :
1 If the distance is small, H0 can not be rejected.
2 If the distance is large, H0 can be rejected.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 173 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Distance measure
This distance is naturally de�ned as follows:
H =�bβ2 � bβ1�0 �V
�bβ2 � bβ1���1 �bβ2 � bβ1�However, the issue is to compute the variance-covariancematrix V
�bβ2 � bβ1� of the di¤erence between both estimators.Generaly we know V
�bβ2� and V�bβ1�, but not V
�bβ2 � bβ1� .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 174 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Lemma (Hausman, 1978)
Based on a sample of n observations, consider two estimates bβ1 and bβ2that are both consistent and asymptotically normally distributed, with bβ1attaining the asymptotic Cramer�Rao bound so that
pn�bβ1 � β
�is
asymptotically normally distributed with variance�covariance matrix V1.Suppose
pn�bβ2 � β
�is asymptotically normally distributed, with mean
zero and variance�covariance matrix V2. Let bq = bβ2 � bβ1. Then thelimiting distributions [under the null] of
pn�bβ1 � β
�and
pnbq have zero
covariance:E(bβ1bq0) = 0K
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 175 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
TheoremFrom this lemma, it follows that
V�bβ2 � bβ1� = V
�bβ2��V�bβ1�
Thus, Hausman suggests using the test statistic
H =�bβ2 � bβ1�0 �V
�bβ2��V�bβ1���1 �bβ2 � bβ1�
or equivalentlyH = bq0 (V (bq))�1 bq
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 176 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Under the null hypothesis, the test statistic H has an asymptoticchi-square distribution with K degrees of freedom.
HHO�!n!∞
χ2 (K )
Under the alternative, it has a noncentral chi-square distribution withnoncentrality parameter eq0 (V (bq))�1 eq, where eq is de�ned as follows:
eq = plimH1/n!∞
�bβ2 � bβ1�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 177 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Speci�cation test for �xed versus random e¤ects
Let us apply the Hausman�s test to discriminate between �xed e¤ectsmethods and random e¤ects methods.
We assume that αi are random variable and the key assumptiontested is here de�ned as:
H0 : E (αi jXi ) = 0
H1 : E (αi jXi ) 6= 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 178 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
De�nition (Hausman�s speci�cation test)The Hausman speci�cation test is a test of the null of no dependencebetween the (random) individual e¤ects and the explanatory variables.
H0 : E (αi jXi ) = 0
H1 : E (αi jXi ) 6= 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 179 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Speci�cation test for �xed versus random e¤ects
The Hausman�s test can also be interpreted as a speci�cation test between"�xed e¤ect methods" and "random e¤ect methods".
1 If the null is rejected, the correlation between individual e¤ects andthe explicative variables induces a bias in the GLS estimates. So, astandard LSDV approach (�xed e¤ects method) has to beprivilegiated.
2 If the null is not rejected, we can use a GLS estimator (random e¤ectmethod) and specify the individual e¤ects as random variables(random e¤ects model).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 180 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Hausman�s speci�cation test
How to implement this test? Let us consider the standard model withrandom e¤ects (µ = 0):
yi = Xi β+ eαi + vi
1 Under H0 (and assumptions A2) we know that bβLSDV and bβGLS areconsistent and asymptotically normally distributed.
2 Under H0, bβGLS is BLUE and attains asymptotic Cramer�Rao bound.3 Under H1, bβGLS is not consistent.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 181 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
According to the Hausman�s lemma, we have (for K = 1):
cov�bβGLS ,�bβLSDV � bβGLS�� = 0() cov
�bβLSDV , bβGLS� = V�bβGLS�
Since,
V�bβLSDV � bβGLS� = V
�bβLSDV �+V�bβGLS�� 2cov �bβLSDV , bβGLS�
We have:
V�bβLSDV � bβGLS� = V
�bβLSDV ��V�bβGLS�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 182 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
De�nition (Hausman�s speci�cation test)The Hausman speci�cation test statistic of individual e¤ect can be de�nedas follows:
H =�bβLSDV � bβGLS�0 �V
�bβLSDV ��V�bβGLS���1 �bβLSDV � bβGLS�
Under H0 : E (αi jXi ) = 0, we have:
HHO�!
nT!∞χ2 (K )
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 183 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Remarks
H =�bβLSDV � bβGLS�0 �V
�bβLSDV ��V�bβGLS���1 �bβLSDV � bβGLS�
Let us assume that K = 1, then under the null H0 : E (αi jXi ) = 0
V�bβLSDV ��V
�bβGLS� > 0since bβGLS is the BLUE.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 184 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
Remarks
1 When n is �xed and T tends to in�nity, bβGLS and bβMCG becomeidentical. However, it was shown by Ahn and Moon (2001) that thenumerator and denominator of H approach zero at the same speed.Therefore the ratio remains chi-square distributed. However, in thissituation the �xed-e¤ects and random-e¤ects models becomeindistinguishable for all practical purposes.
2 The more typical case in practice is that n is large relative to T , sothat di¤erences between the two estimators or two approaches areimportant problems.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 185 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
ExampleLet us consider a simple panel regression model for the total number ofstrikes days in OECD countries. We have a balanced panel data set for 17countries (n = 17) and annual data form 1951 to 1985 (T = 35).
sit = αi + βiuit + γipit + εit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 186 / 258
5.2. Hausman�s speci�cation test
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 187 / 258
5. Speci�cations tests
Key Concepts Section 5
1 Mundlak�s speci�cation.
2 Dependence between random e¤ects and explanatory variables.
3 The GLS estimator may be not consistent (�xed T , n tends toin�nity).
4 The GLS is always consistent when T tends to in�nity.
5 Hausman�s lemma.
6 Hausman�s speci�cation test for �xed or random e¤ects models.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 188 / 258
Section 6
Heterogeneous Panel Data Models
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 189 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Objectives
1 De�ne the heterogeneous panel data model.
2 Introduce the random coe¢ cient model.
3 Introduce the Swamy�s model.
4 De�ne the GLS estimator
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 190 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
There are cases in which there are changing economic structures ordi¤erent socioeconomic and demographic background factors that implythat the slope parameters β may be varying over time and/or may bedi¤erent for di¤erent crosssectional units.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 191 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data model
The most general form of an heterogeneous and time-varying coe¢ cientmodel is:
yit =K
∑k=1
βkitxkit + vit i = 1, .., n and t = 1, ..,T
In contrast to previous sections, we no longer treat the intercept di¤erentlythan other explanatory variables and let x1it = 1.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 192 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Assumption H4: We assume that parameters do not vary with time.Then, we have:
βkit = βki
yit =K
∑k=1
βkixkit + vit i = 1, .., n and t = 1, ..,T
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 193 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Panel or not panel?
This model is equivalent to postulating a separate regression for eachcross-sectional unit
yit = β0ixit + vit i = 1, .., n
where βi = (β1i , β2i , ..., βKi )0 is a K � 1 vector of parameters, and
xit = (x1it , ..., xKit )0 is a K � 1 vector of exogenous variables.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 194 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Panel or not panel?
yit = β0ixit + vit i = 1, .., n
But some "links" between the individuals may require a panel regressionmodel :
The error terms vit are cross-correlated among cross-units.
The slope parameters βi are considered as random variable with acommon probability distribution or at least common moments
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 195 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
De�nition (heterogeneous slope parameters)
The vectors of slope parameters βi are assumed to satisfy
βi(K ,1)
= β(K ,1)
+ ζ i(K ,1)
for i = 1, .., n, where β is a K � 1 vector of constants, and ζ i denotes aK � 1 vector of constant or random variables.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 196 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
The heterogeneous coe¢ cient model becomes
yit =K
∑k=1
(βk + ξki ) xkit + vit i = 1, .., n and t = 1, ..,T
β = (β1, β2, ..., βK )0 denotes the common mean coe¢ cient K � 1
vector.
ξ i = (ξ1i , ξ2i , ..., ξKi )0 is the vector of individual deviation from the
common mean.
The errors terms may be cross-correlated or not, i.e.cov (vjit , vit ) 6= 0 or cov (vjit , vit ) = 0.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 197 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
For this type of model we are interested in
1 Estimating the mean coe¢ cient vector β,
2 Predicting each individual component βi ,
3 Estimating the dispersion of the individual-parameter vectors βi ,
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 198 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel models with �xed or random coe¢ cients
1 If individual observations are heterogeneous, then ξ i can be treated as�xed constants.
2 If conditional on xkit , individual units can be viewed as random drawsfrom a common population, then ξ i are generally treated as randomvariables having for instance, zero means and constant variances andcovariances.
E (ζ i ) = 0 and V (ζ i ) = ∆
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 199 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
De�nition (Fixed-coe¢ cient model)
When βi are treated as �xed constants, we can stack the nTobservations in the form of the Zellner (1962) seemingly unrelatedregression (SURE) model0@ y1
.yn
1A =
0@ X1 0 00 .. ..0 .. Xn
1A0@ β1.
βn
1A+0@ v1
.vn
1Awhere yi and vi are T � 1 vectors (yit , ..., yiT ) and (vit , ..., viT ), and Xi isthe T �K matrix of the time-series observations of the i th individual�sexplanatory variables with the tth row equal to xit .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 200 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel models with �xed coe¢ cients
1 If the covariances between di¤erent cross-sectional units are not zero,e.g. E (vivj 0) 6= 0, the GLS estimator of
�β01, ..., β
0n
�is more e¢ cient
than the single-equation estimator of i for each cross-sectional unit.Panel data is useful.
2 If Xi are identical for all i or E (vivi 0) = σ2i IT and E (vivj 0) = 0 fori 6= j , the GLS estimator for
�β01, ..., β
0n
�is the same as applying least
squares separately to the time-series observations of eachcross-sectional unit. Panel data is useless.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 201 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
De�nition (random coe¢ cient model)Alternatively, each regression coe¢ cient can be viewed as a randomvariable with a common probability distribution:
βii .i .d .� Common Distribution
or at least common moments:
E (βi ) = β V (βi ) = ∆ 8i = 1, ..., n
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 202 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Random coe¢ cient model
1 The random-coe¢ cient speci�cation reduces the number ofparameters to be estimated substantially, while still allowing thecoe¢ cients to di¤er from unit to unit and/or from time to time.
2 Depending on the type of assumption about the parameter variation,it can be further classi�ed into one of two categories: stationary andnonstationary random-coe¢ cient models.
3 For more details, see Hurwicz (1950), Klein (1953), Theil and Mennes(1959), or Zellner (1966).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 203 / 258
Subsection 6.1
Random Coe¢ cient Models
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 204 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (random coe¢ cient model)
The vectors of slope parameters βi are randomly distributed with acommon mean E (βi ) = β, and
yit =K
∑k=1
(βk + ξki ) xkit + vit i = 1, .., n
with β = (β1, β2, ..., βK )0 and ξ i = (ξ1i , ξ2i , ..., ξKi ). Let us denote
βki = βk + ξki
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 205 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Remarks
1 The vector xi = (x1i ..xKi ) includes a constant term. The parameterβki associated to this constant term corresponds to an individual(random) e¤ect.
2 An alternative notation is:
yit = α+K
∑k=2
(βk + ξki ) xkit + αi + vit
E (αi ) = 0
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 206 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Consider the set of assumptions used in the seminal paper of Swamy(1970).
Swamy P.A. (1970), �E¢ cient Inference in a Random Coe¢ cient RegressionModel�, Econometrica, 38, 311-323
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 207 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Assumption H5 (Swamy�s model): Let us assume that
E (ξ i ) = 0, E (vi ) = 0
E�ξ i ξ
0j
�=
�∆0
i = j8i 6= j
E�xitξ
0j
�= 0, E
�ξ iv
0j
�= 0, 8 (i , j)
E (vivj 0) =�
σ2i IT0
t = s, i = j8t 6= s, 8i 6= j
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 208 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Remark: we assume that the error term vi is heteroskedastic:
E�viv 0i
�= σ2i IT
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 209 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (moments of slopes parameters)
The two �rst moments of the vector of random parameters βi = β+ ξ iare de�ned by, 8 i = 1, ..n :
E (βi )(K ,1)
= β(K ,1)
V (βi )(K ,K )
= E�ξ i ξ
0i
�= ∆(K ,K )
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 210 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Homegeneous moments
The variance covariance matrix ∆ of the random parametersβi = (β1i , β2i , .., βKi )
0 is assumed to be common to all cross section units:
∆(K ,K )
= E�(βi � β) (βi � β)0
�=
0BBB@σ2β1
σβ1,β2... σβ1,βK
σβ2,β1σ2β2
... σβ2,βK
... ... ... ...σβK ,β1
σβK ,β2... σ2βK
1CCCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 211 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Vectorial form
For each cross section unit, we have:
yi = Xi β+ Xi ξ i + vi
βi = β+ ξ i
where the vector Xi include a constant term (i.e. the average of randomindividual e¤ects, α).
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 212 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (random coe¢ cient model)The random coe¢ cient model can be rewriten as follows :
yi = Xi β+ εi
εi = Xi ξ i + vi = Xi (βi � β) + vi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 213 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Covariance matrix
For a given cross unit, the covariance matrix for the composite disturbanceterm εi = Xi ξ i + vi is de�ned by:
Φi = E�εi ε0i
�= E
�(Xi ξ i + vi ) (Xi ξ i + vi )
0�= XiE
�ξ i ξ
0i
�X 0i +E
�viv 0i
�= Xi∆X 0i + σ2i IT
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 214 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nitionFor a given cross unit, the covariance matrix for the composite disturbanceterm εi = Xi ξ i + vi is de�ned by:
Φi = Xi∆X 0i + σ2i IT
Stacking all nT observations, the covariance matrix for the compositedisturbance term is block-diagonal and heteroskedastic.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 215 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Remarks
1 Under Swamy�s assumption, the simple regression of y on X will yieldan unbiased and consistent estimator of β if (1/nT )X 0X convergesto a nonzero constant matrix.
2 But the estimator is ine¢ cient, and the usual least-squares formulafor computing the variance�covariance matrix of the estimator isincorrect, often leading to misleading statistical inferences.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 216 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (GLS estimator)
The best linear unbiased estimator of β is the GLS estimator
bβGLS =
n
∑i=1X 0i Φ
�1i Xi
!�1 n
∑i=1X 0i Φ
�1i yi
!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 217 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (GLS estimator)
The GLS estimator bβGLS is a matrix-weighted average of the least-squaresestimator bβi for each cross-sectional unit, with the weights inverselyproportional to their covariance matrices:
bβGLS = n
∑i=1
ωibβiωi =
n
∑i=1
�∆+ σ2i
�X 0i Xi
��1��1!�1 h∆+ σ2i�X 0i Xi
��1i�1bβi = �X 0i Xi ��1 X 0i yi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 218 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
The covariance matrix for the GLS estimator is:
V�bβGLS� =
n
∑i=1X 0i Φ
�1i Xi
!�1
=
n
∑i=1
�∆+ σ2i
�X 0i Xi
��1��1!�1
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 219 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Feasible GLS estimator
Swamy proposes to use the OLS estimators bβi = (X 0i Xi )�1 X 0i yi and theirresiduals bvi = yi � Xibβi to obtain unbiased estimators of σ2i and ∆
bσ2i=
1T �K y
0i
�IT � Xi
�X 0i Xi
��1 X 0i � yi=
1T �K
T
∑t=1bvit
withyit = β0ixit + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 220 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Feasible GLS estimator
For the ∆ matrix, we have:
b∆(K ,K )
=1
n� 1n
∑i=1
bβi � 1n
n
∑i=1
bβi! bβi � 1
n
n
∑i=1
bβi!0!
�1n
n
∑i=1
bσ2i
�X 0i Xi
��1
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 221 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (estimator for ∆)
However, the previous estimator b∆ is not necessarily nonnegative de�nite.In this situation, Swamy (1970) has suggested replacing this estimator by:
b∆(K ,K )
=1
n� 1n
∑i=1
bβi � 1n
n
∑i=1
bβi! bβi � 1
n
n
∑i=1
bβi!0!
This estimator, although not unbiased, is nonnegative de�nite and isconsistent when T tends to in�nity.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 222 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Remarks
1 Swamy proved that substituting bσ2iand b∆ for σ2
iand ∆ yields an
asymptotically normal and e¢ cient estimator of β.
2 The speed of convergence of the GLS estimator is n1/2.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 223 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Summary: how to estimate a random coe¢ cient model?
1 Run the n individual regressions yit = β0ixit + vit .
2 Compute bσ2iand the Swamy�s estimator b∆ as follows
b∆(K ,K )
=1
n� 1n
∑i=1
bβi � 1n
n
∑i=1
bβi! bβi � 1
n
n
∑i=1
bβi!0!
bσ2i=
1T �K
T
∑t=1bvit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 224 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
3. Compute the GLS estimate of the mean of the parameters βi
bβGLS =
n
∑i=1X 0i bΦ�1
i Xi
!�1 n
∑i=1X 0i bΦ�1
i yi
!
with bΦi = Xi b∆X 0i + bσ2i IT
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 225 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Example (Swamy, 1970)
Swamy (1970) used this model to reestimate the Grunfeld investmentfunction with the annual data of 11 U.S. corporations. His GLS estimatesof the common-mean coe¢ cients of the �rms�beginning-of-year value ofoutstanding shares and capital stock are 0.0843 and 0.1961, withasymptotic standard errors 0.014 and 0.0412, respectively. The estimateddispersion measure of these coe¢ cients is
b∆ = � 0.0011 �0.00020.0187
�
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 226 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Predicting Individual Coe¢ cients
1 Sometimes one may wish to predict the individual component βi ,because it provides information on the behavior of each individual andalso because it provides a basis for predicting future values of thedependent variable for a given individual.
2 Swamy (1970, 1971) has shown that the best linear unbiasedpredictor, conditional on given xi , is the least-squares estimator bβi .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 227 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
De�nition (individual predictors for βi )
Lee and Gri¢ ths (1979) suggest predicting βi by
β�i =bβGLS + ∆X 0i
�Xi∆X 0i + σ2i IT
��1 �yi � XibβGLS�
This predictor is the best linear unbiased estimator in the sense thatE (β�i � βi ) = 0, where the expectation is an unconditional one.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 228 / 258
6.1. Random coe¢ cient model
Predicting Individual Coe¢ cients : Lindley and Smith (1972)
1 It is also possible to consider a Bayesian approach: the randomcoe¢ cient model is also called the hierarchical model
2 In this case, the prior distribution for the βi parameters is speci�edwith the value for β, ∆ and σ2i .
3 From a Bayesian perspective, the likelihood is combined with priors togenerate posterior distributions of the parameters.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 229 / 258
Subsection 6.2
Other Heterogeneous Panel Data Models
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 230 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 231 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 232 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
De�nition (mixed �xed and random coe¢ cient model)We assume that each cross section unit is di¤erent
yit =K
∑k=1
βkixki +m
∑l=1
γliwli + vit i = 1, .., n
where xit and wit are each a K � 1 and an m� 1 vector of explanatoryvariables that are independent of the error of the equation vit .
Hsiao C. (1989), �Modelling Ontrario Regional Electricity System DemandUsing a Mixed Fixed and Random Coe¤cient Approaoch�, Regional Scienceand Urban Economics, 19, 565-587
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 233 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Assumptions
The parameters β(nK ,1)
= (β01, β02, ..., β
0K )0 are assumed to be randomly
distributed
The parameters γ(nm,1)
= (γ01,γ02, ...,γ
0m)0 are �xed.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 234 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
In a vectorial form, we have
y(nT ,1)
= X(nT ,nK )
β(nK ,1)
+ W(nT ,nm)
γ(nm,1)
+ v(nT ,1)
X =
0BB@X1 0 00 X2
0 Xn
1CCA W =
0BB@W1 0 00 W2
0 Wn
1CCA
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 235 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Assumptions on the random coe¢ cients
The coe¢ cients of xit are assumed to be subject to stochastic restrictionsof the form
β = A1β+ ζ
A1 is an nK � L matrix with known elements,
β is an L� 1 vector of constants,
ζ is assumed to be (normally distributed) random variables with mean0 and nonsingular constant covariance matrix C and is independent ofxi .
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 236 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Assumptions on the �xed coe¢ cients
The coe¢ cients of wit are assumed to be subject to
γ = A2γ
A2 is an nm� n matrix with known elements,
γ is an n� 1 vector of constants.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 237 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
MFR model
Since A2 is known, we can rewrite the model as
y(nT ,1)
= X(nT ,nK )
β(K ,1)
+ fW(nT ,n)
γ(n,1)
+ v(nT ,1)
where fW = WA2.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 238 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Many of the linear panel data models with unobserved individual speci�cbut time-invariant heterogeneity can be treated as special cases of thismodel.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 239 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
ExampleA common model for all cross-sectional units. If there is no interindividualdi¤erence in behavioral patterns, we may let X = 0, A2 = en Im , somodel becomes
yit = witγ+ vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 240 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
ExampleWhen each individual is considered di¤erent, then X = 0, A2 = In Im ,and the model becomes
yit = witγi + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 241 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
ExampleWhen the e¤ects of the individual speci�c, time-invariant omitted variablesare treated as random variables just as in the assumption on the e¤ects ofother omitted variables, we can let Xi = eT , ζ 0 = (ζ1, ..., ζn), A1 = en,C = Inσ2α, β be an unknown constant, and wit not contain an interceptterm. Then the model becomes:
yit = β+ γ0wit + ζ i + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 242 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 243 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 244 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Consider an heterogeneous panel data model
yit = β0ixit + vit i = 1, .., n
A consistent estimator of β = E (βi ) can be obtained under moregeneral assumptions concerning βi and the regressors.
One such possible estimator is the Mean Group (MG) estimatorproposed by Pesaran and Smith (1995) for estimation of dynamicrandom coe¢ cient models.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 245 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
De�nition (mean group estimator)
The mean group (MG) estimator is de�ned as the simple average of theOLS estimators bβi bβMG = 1
n
n
∑i=1
bβi
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 246 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Mean Group (MG) estimator
When the regressors are strictly exogeneous and the errors are i.i.d, anunbiased estimator of the covariance matrix is given by
V�bβMG� = 1
nb∆
b∆ = 1n� 1
n
∑i=1
bβi � 1n
n
∑i=1
bβi! bβi � 1
n
n
∑i=1
bβi!0!
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 247 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
For more details
Pesaran, M.H. and R. Smith (1995), �Estimation of Long-Run Relationshipsfrom Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels�, Journal of Econometrics, 68, 79-114.
Pesaran, M.H.,Y. Shin and R.P. Smith, (1999), �PooledMean GroupEstimation of Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels�, Journal of the AmericanStatistical Association, 94, 621-634.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 248 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 249 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Heterogeneous panel data models
There are many other way to model the heterogeneity of slope parameters:
1 Mixed �xed and random (MFR) coe¢ cients model.
2 Mean group estimation.
3 Panel threshold regression models.
4 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
5 etc.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 250 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
Bonhomme S. and E. Manresa (2015), Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity inPanel Data, Econometrica, 83(3), 1147-1184
This paper introduces time-varying Grouped Patterns ofHeterogeneity in linear panel data models.
A distinctive feature of this approach is that group membership is leftunrestricted.
The authors estimate the parameters of the model using a �grouped�xed-e¤ects� estimator that minimizes a least-squares criterion withrespect to all possible groupings of the cross-sectional units.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 251 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
A simple linear model with grouped patterns of heterogeneity takes thefollowing form
yit = x 0itθ + αgi t + vit
αgi ,t 2 A � R denotes a group-speci�c unobservable variable
The group membership variables gi 2 f1, ...,Gg and thegroup-speci�c time e¤ects αgi t are unrestricted.
Units in the same group share the same time pro�le αgt
The number of groups G is to be set or estimated by the researcher.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 252 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
De�nitionThe grouped �xed-e¤ects estimator in this model is de�ned as the solutionof the following minimization problem:
�bθ,bα, bγ� = argmin n
∑i=1
T
∑t=1
�yit � x 0itθ � αgi t
�2where the minimum is taken over all possible groupings γ = fg1, ..., gng ofthe n units into G groups, common parameters θ, and group-speci�c timee¤ects α.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 253 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
De�nitionFor given values of θ and α, the optimal group assignment for eachindividual unit is given by:
bgi (θ, α) = argming2f1,...,G g
T
∑t=1
�yit � x 0itθ � αgt
�2
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 254 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
This model can be extended to allow for group-speci�c e¤ects ofcovariates (heterogeneous slope coe¢ cients):
yit = x 0itθgi + αgi t + vit
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 255 / 258
6.2. Other hetorogeneous panel data models
The authors propose a very intuitive iterative algorithm to:
Estimate the parameters
Determine the group membership
For more details, see
Bonhomme S. and E. Manresa (2015), Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity inPanel Data, Econometrica, 83(3), 1147-1184
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 256 / 258
6. Heterogeneous panel data models
Key Concepts Section 6
1 Heterogeneous panel data model.
2 Random coe¢ cient model.
3 GLS estimator.
4 Hierarchical model.
5 Mixed �xed and random coe¢ cients model.
6 Mean group estimator.
7 Grouped Patterns of Heterogeneity.
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 257 / 258
End of Chapter 1
Christophe Hurlin (University of Orléans)
C. Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics II February 2018 258 / 258
top related