Testing Hypotheses in an I(2) Model with Applications to the Persistent Long Swings in the Dmk/$ Rate



Table 1: Estimated outlier coefficients

Dummy variables in the model

Dtax

79:10

82:08

84:01

85:02

86:02

88:08

89:02

97:07

∆∆pp

0.01
[9.77]

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

0.01
[3.49]

∆∆s12

*

*

*

0.06
[2.67]

*

0.07

[-2.35]

*

*

*

∆∆π

*

*

0.00

[-2.75]

*

*

0.00

[-3.33]

*

*

*

∆∆51

*

*

*

*

0.00
[2.36]

*

*

*

*

∆∆62

*

0.00
[2.31]

0.00

[-2.64]

*

0.00
[4.08]

0.00

[-3.96]

*

*

*

∆∆s1

*

*

*

*

0.00
[2.79]

*

0.00
[5.55]

0.00
[4.40]

*

∆∆s2

*

0.00

[5.18]

0.00

[-12.67]

0.00

[-13.41]

0.00
[3.27]

*

*

*

*

t-values in brackets, * indicates a t-value 2.0

robust to moderate ARCH and excess kurtosis.

7 Determining the two reduced rank indices

The number of stationary polynomial cointegrating relations, r, and the number of
I(1) trends, s1, among the common stochastic trends, p r, are determined by the
ML trace test procedure in Johansen (1997). Table 3 reports the tests of the joint
hypothesis (
r, s1 , s2) for all values of r,s1 and s2∙ The test procedure starts with the
most restricted model (
r = 0, s1 = 0, s2 = 5) in the upper left hand corner, continues
to the end of the first row (
r = 0, s1 = 5, s2 = 0), and proceeds similarly row-wise from
left to right until the first acceptance. Based on the tests, the first acceptance is at
(
r = 2, s1 = 4, s2 = 1), whereas the next acceptance is at (r = 3, s1 = 2, s2 = 2), which
is at a much higher p-values.

Since our model has a broken linear trend restricted to be in the cointegration
relations, and a shift dummy restricted to the differences, the asymptotic trace test
distribution provided by CATS should be shifted to the right, i.e., the test is likely to
be somewhat undersized. The trace tests suggest the possibility of either
r = 2 or 3.
Thus, it is useful to perform a sensitivity check before the final choice of r, s1, and s2.

The characteristic roots assuming no 1(2) trends show that the choice of (r = 2, s1 =
5) leaves a large unrestricted root (0.90) in the model, whereas (
r = 3,s1 = 4) leaves
two (0.93 and 0.90). Both cases seem to suggest a total of approximately six (near) unit
roots in the model, consistent with both (
r = 2, s1 = 3, s2 = 2) and (r = 3, s1 = 2, s2 =
2). Thus, the final decision seems to be between two (three) polynomial cointegration
relations (
^'xt + J^t) and three (two) medium-run relations in differences (^zl1^).
Checking the tvalues of a3 shows five highly significant coefficients (with t-values
in the range of 15.4 to 3.4), which suggests that the third polynomial cointegration

15



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. Dual Track Reforms: With and Without Losers
4. Legal Minimum Wages and the Wages of Formal and Informal Sector Workers in Costa Rica
5. Review of “The Hesitant Hand: Taming Self-Interest in the History of Economic Ideas”
6. Ronald Patterson, Violinist; Brooks Smith, Pianist
7. Robust Econometrics
8. Epistemology and conceptual resources for the development of learning technologies
9. The name is absent
10. Wettbewerbs- und Industriepolitik - EU-Integration als Dritter Weg?
11. Why unwinding preferences is not the same as liberalisation: the case of sugar
12. Weak and strong sustainability indicators, and regional environmental resources
13. The Mathematical Components of Engineering
14. Behavioural Characteristics and Financial Distress
15. The name is absent
16. Experimental Evidence of Risk Aversion in Consumer Markets: The Case of Beef Tenderness
17. Demand Potential for Goat Meat in Southern States: Empirical Evidence from a Multi-State Goat Meat Consumer Survey
18. CROSS-COMMODITY PERSPECTIVE ON CONTRACTING: EVIDENCE FROM MISSISSIPPI
19. Der Einfluß der Direktdemokratie auf die Sozialpolitik
20. The Formation of Wenzhou Footwear Clusters: How Were the Entry Barriers Overcome?