Nonparametric cointegration analysis



The details of the test results involved are presented in the separate appendix to this
paper.

8.4. Monte Carlo comparison

In order to check whether the above results are typical for this data set or not, and
which test performs better, we have conducted our nonparametric tests and Johansen’s tests
on 500 replications of ln(wages) and ln(GNP) with sample size
n = 80, on the basis of the
estimated ECM (24) with
p = 8, and an intercept plus linear trend π00 + π01t, where π01 is
proportional to
γ. The first eight observations were taken from the actual data set, and the
errors
et were drawn independently from the bi-variate normal distribution with zero mean
vector and variance matrix equal to the estimated variance matrix. All tests are conducted at
the 10% significance level. Johansen’s tests are conducted for
p = 6, 8 and 10, in order to
check the sensitivity of these tests for the VAR order
p, with an intercept and a linear trend
included in the ECM, and cointegration restrictions on the trend parameters imposed.

The Monte Carlo results, presented in Table 5, indicate that for this data-generating
process our nonparametric test for testing the number of cointegrating vectors performs better
than Johansen’s lambda-max test, even for the correct VAR order
p = 8. The nonparametric
test gives in about 79% of all cases the correct answer
r = 1, whereas the corresponding
percentages for Johansen’s lambda-max test are only 58% if
p = 6, 70% if p = 8 and 56% if
p = 10. This illustrates once more the importance of finding the correct order p of the ECM:
under as well as over-specification of
p seem to have quite a damaging effect on the test
results for
r. Moreover, Johansen’s test of linear restrictions on the cointegrating vectors
suffers more from size distortions than the nonparametric test, although if we would correct
for size Johansen’s test seems more powerful. At first sight these results seem odd, because
Johansen’s approach is a full ML approach. However, as admitted by Johansen, the optimality
properties of ML may not apply to the nonstandard case involved. The results in Table 5
confirm this conjecture.

<Insert Table 5 about here>

The above Monte Carlo analysis, of course, does not provide sufficient evidence that

29



More intriguing information

1. 03-01 "Read My Lips: More New Tax Cuts - The Distributional Impacts of Repealing Dividend Taxation"
2. The name is absent
3. Stakeholder Activism, Managerial Entrenchment, and the Congruence of Interests between Shareholders and Stakeholders
4. The name is absent
5. CONSUMER PERCEPTION ON ALTERNATIVE POULTRY
6. Social Cohesion as a Real-life Phenomenon: Exploring the Validity of the Universalist and Particularist Perspectives
7. LABOR POLICY AND THE OVER-ALL ECONOMY
8. Effort and Performance in Public-Policy Contests
9. The name is absent
10. Cryothermal Energy Ablation Of Cardiac Arrhythmias 2005: State Of The Art
11. How much do Educational Outcomes Matter in OECD Countries?
12. The name is absent
13. The name is absent
14. Asymmetric transfer of the dynamic motion aftereffect between first- and second-order cues and among different second-order cues
15. The name is absent
16. POWER LAW SIGNATURE IN INDONESIAN LEGISLATIVE ELECTION 1999-2004
17. SLA RESEARCH ON SELF-DIRECTION: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL ISSUES
18. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON VIRGINIA DAIRY FARMS
19. The name is absent
20. Moi individuel et moi cosmique Dans la pensee de Romain Rolland