Testing Panel Data Regression Models with Spatial Error Correlation



J23  =  ôtrh-2 (JT  IN)(IT  (W + W0

2  l¾°

=  122 tr[JT  (W + W0)] = O;

2¾2

where the result that J13 = J23 = 0 follows from the fact that the diagonal elements of W
are 0 and J33 uses the fact that tr(W2) = tr(W02) and b = tr(W 2 + W0W).

Therefore, the information matrix evaluated under H0a is given by

11  0

NT

Jμ = 2¾°


1T   0

(A.6)


0  0  2°

0  0   N

using (A.1), we get

LMJ


2¾~4


NT        2¾~4

0;—^G;NTH (—° )
; 2¾2  ;       NTTf


NT


T

T -1
1

T-1

0


1

T -1
1

T-1

0


0

0

N

2°


0

Nil-
2¾° G
NTH


√^G2 + N2Th 2:

(A.7)


2(T - 1)        b

where G = u (JT, IN)u 1 and H = u (IT-W)u as descibed in (2.11).
uu                uu

Appendix A.2: Conditional LM test for λ = O (given ¾2 > O)

In this appendix we derive the conditional LM test which tests for no spatial error correlation
given the existence of random regional effects. The null hypothesis is given by
Hd: λ = 0
(assuming ¾2 0). Under the null hyphothesis, the variance-covariance matrix reduces to
0 = ¾2Jτ IN + ¾°INT. It is the familiar form of the one-way error component model, see

Baltagi(1995), with -1 = (¾2)-1(JT IN) + (¾°)-1(Et IN), where ¾2 = 2 + ¾°.

Under the null hypothesis Hd : λ = 0 (assuming ¾2 0), we get

u-1jH0d

@ ul

@^ jHd

@ ul

@^ jHd

@ ul

@\ jHd


( — JT +—2 Et ¢  IN ;

¾1      ¾°

IT  IN ;

JT  IN ;

¾° IT  (W + W 0):


(A.8)

(A.9)

(A.10)

(A.11)


21




More intriguing information

1. Regional differentiation in the Russian federation: A cluster-based typification
2. Output Effects of Agri-environmental Programs of the EU
3. Achieving the MDGs – A Note
4. The name is absent
5. Gender and aquaculture: sharing the benefits equitably
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. IMMIGRATION AND AGRICULTURAL LABOR POLICIES
10. The name is absent