Testing Panel Data Regression Models with Spatial Error Correlation



2.5 LR Test for Ha: λ = ¾2 = 0

We also compute the Likelihood ratio (LR) test for Ha: A = ¾2l = 0.  Estimation of the

unrestricted log-likelihood function is obtained using the method of scoring. The details of
the estimation procedure are available upon request from the authors. Let
A°, A, b and b
denote the unrestricted maximum likelihood estimators and let Bb = INAW and u = yX0b,
then the unrestricted maximum log-likelihood estimator function is given by

NT         1                                    1

Lu =       ln2¼¾° ~n InljTAIN + (BA0IA)-1 j] + (T — 1) ln B —   .l ti§-1^;    (2.21)

2            2                                        2¾°

see Anselin (1988), where §b is obtained from (2.8) with Bb replacing B and Ab replacing A: But
under the null hypothesis
Ha, the variance-covariance matrix reduces to U = u = ¾°IτN
and the restricted maximum likelihood estimator of β is ~~ols , so that ~ = y X,∕~ols
are the OLS residuals and ¾° = U0U=ΝT. Therefore, the restricted maximum log-likelihood
function under
Haa is given by

NT        1

Lr = —in ln 2¼¾° — ..2 u ~∙                                               (2.22)

2            2¾°

Hence, the likelihood ratio test statistic for Haa : A = ¾2p = 0 is given by

LRJ = 2(LuLr);                                                            (2.23)

and this should be asymptotically distributed as a mixture of Â2 given in (2.20) under the
null hypothesis.

2.6 Conditional LM Test for Had: λ = 0 (assuming ¾2 > 0)

When one uses LM2; given by (2.16), to test Hac : A = 0; one implicitly assumes that the
random region effects do not exist. This may lead to incorrect decisions especially when
¾2
is large. To overcome this problem, this section derives a conditional LM test for spatially
uncorrelated disturbances assuming the possible existence of random regional effects. The
null hypothesis for this model is
Had : A = 0 (assuming ¾2p > 0). Under the null hyphothesis,
the variance-covariance matrix reduces to
a = ¾2pJT IN + ¾2°INT . It is the familiar form
of the one-way error component model, see Baltagi(1995), with
-1 = (¾2)-1(Jτ IN) +
(
¾°)-1(Et   IN), where ¾2 = iμ + ¾°; and Et = ItJt. Using derivations analogous

to those for the joint LM-test, see Appendix A.1, we obtain the following LM test for Had vs
H1d,



More intriguing information

1. Design and investigation of scalable multicast recursive protocols for wired and wireless ad hoc networks
2. GROWTH, UNEMPLOYMENT AND THE WAGE SETTING PROCESS.
3. Aktive Klienten - Aktive Politik? (Wie) Läßt sich dauerhafte Unabhängigkeit von Sozialhilfe erreichen? Ein Literaturbericht
4. Asymmetric transfer of the dynamic motion aftereffect between first- and second-order cues and among different second-order cues
5. Demand Potential for Goat Meat in Southern States: Empirical Evidence from a Multi-State Goat Meat Consumer Survey
6. NATURAL RESOURCE SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: A COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM APPROACH
7. Empirical Calibration of a Least-Cost Conservation Reserve Program
8. BUSINESS SUCCESS: WHAT FACTORS REALLY MATTER?
9. Computational Experiments with the Fuzzy Love and Romance
10. AJAE Appendix: Willingness to Pay Versus Expected Consumption Value in Vickrey Auctions for New Experience Goods