IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-05c10003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward a unified approach to testing for weak separability

Author

Listed:
  • David Edgerton

    (Lund University)

  • Donald Dutkowsky

    (Syracuse University)

  • Thomas Elger

    (Lund University)

  • Barry Jones

    (State University of New York at Binghamton)

Abstract

In this paper we propose a unified framework for testing weak separability. We present a new three-step procedure, which is a joint test of necessary and sufficient conditions that takes account of possible measurement error and incomplete adjustment. We illustrate the operational capability of the procedure with an empirical example. Our procedure works well in medium sized samples, but at the present time may not be practical for datasets with extremely large sample sizes. As computing technology continues to advance, however, high-powered methods like the one we propose should supplant testing approaches that were originally designed to circumvent computational limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • David Edgerton & Donald Dutkowsky & Thomas Elger & Barry Jones, 2005. "Toward a unified approach to testing for weak separability," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(20), pages 1-7.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-05c10003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/EB/2005/Volume3/EB-05C10003A.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Varian, Hal R, 1982. "The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 945-973, July.
    2. Lee A. Craig & Douglas Fisher, 1997. "The Demand for Money," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Integration of the European Economy, 1850–1913, chapter 7, pages 160-186, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Hal R. Varian, 1983. "Non-parametric Tests of Consumer Behaviour," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(1), pages 99-110.
    4. Kyrre Rickertsen, 1998. "The demand for food and beverages in Norway," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(1), pages 89-100, January.
    5. Fisher, Douglas & Fleissig, Adrian R, 1997. "Monetary Aggregation and the Demand for Assets," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 29(4), pages 458-475, November.
    6. William A. Barnett & Seungmook Choi, 2004. "A Monte Carlo Study of Tests of Blockwise Weak Separability," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Functional Structure and Approximation in Econometrics, pages 257-287, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    7. Manser, Marilyn E & McDonald, Richard J, 1988. "An Analysis of Substitution Bias in Measuring Inflation, 1959-85," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(4), pages 909-930, July.
    8. Swofford, James L. & Whitney, Gerald A., 1994. "A revealed preference test for weakly separable utility maximization with incomplete adjustment," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1-2), pages 235-249.
    9. Swofford, James L & Whitney, Gerald A, 1987. "Nonparametric Tests of Utility Maximization and Weak Separability for Consumption, Leisure and Money," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(3), pages 458-464, August.
    10. Varian, Hal R., 1985. "Non-parametric analysis of optimizing behavior with measurement error," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 445-458.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elger, C. Thomas & Jones, Barry E. & Edgerton, David L. & Binner, Jane M., 2008. "A Note On The Optimal Level Of Monetary Aggregation In The United Kingdom," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 117-131, February.
    2. Barnett, William A. & de Peretti, Philippe, 2009. "Admissible Clustering Of Aggregator Components: A Necessary And Sufficient Stochastic Seminonparametric Test For Weak Separability," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(S2), pages 317-334, September.
    3. Elger Thomas & Binner Jane M., 2004. "The UK Household Sector Demand for Risky Money," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-22, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bergh , Andreas & Nilsson, Therese, 2008. "Do economic liberalization and globalization increase income inequality?," Working Papers 2008:12, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    2. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & De Rock, Bram & Hjertstrand, Per, 2015. "Revealed preference tests for weak separability: An integer programming approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 129-141.
    3. Binner, Jane M. & Bissoondeeal, Rakesh K. & Elger, C. Thomas & Jones, Barry E. & Mullineux, Andrew W., 2009. "Admissible monetary aggregates for the euro area," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 99-114, February.
    4. Elger, Thomas & Jones, Barry & Edgerton, David & Binner, Jane, 2004. "The Optimal Level of Monetary Aggregation in the UK," Working Papers 2004:7, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 26 Jan 2005.
    5. Barnett, William A. & de Peretti, Philippe, 2009. "Admissible Clustering Of Aggregator Components: A Necessary And Sufficient Stochastic Seminonparametric Test For Weak Separability," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(S2), pages 317-334, September.
    6. Binner, Jane & Elger, Thomas & de Peretti, Philipe, 2002. "Is UK Risky Money Weakly Separable? A Stochastic Approach," Working Papers 2002:13, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    7. Jones, Barry E. & Dutkowsky, Donald H. & Elger, Thomas, 2005. "Sweep programs and optimal monetary aggregation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 483-508, February.
    8. Jones, Barry E. & Stracca, Livio, 2006. "Are money and consumption additively separable in the euro area? A non-parametric approach," Working Paper Series 704, European Central Bank.
    9. Ian Crawford & Bram De Rock, 2014. "Empirical Revealed Preference," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 503-524, August.
    10. Hjertstrand, Per & Jones, Barry E., 2013. "What Do Revealed Preference Axioms Reveal about Elasticities of Demand?," Working Paper Series 972, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    11. Serletis, Apostolos & Rangel-Ruiz, Ricardo, 2005. "Microeconometrics and measurement matters: Some results from monetary economics for Canada," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 307-330, June.
    12. Drake, Leigh & Fleissig, Adrian R., 2010. "Substitution between monetary assets and consumer goods: New evidence on the monetary transmission mechanism," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 2811-2821, November.
    13. Steven D. Silver, 2016. "A QUAIDS Model of Need-Based Structure in U.S. Personal Consumption 2006–2012," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 44(3), pages 303-323, September.
    14. Raghbendra Jha & Ibotombi Longjam, 2006. "Structure of Financial Savings During Indian Economic Reforms," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 861-869, November.
    15. Smeulders, Bart & Crama, Yves & Spieksma, Frits C.R., 2019. "Revealed preference theory: An algorithmic outlook," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 803-815.
    16. Fleissig, Adrian R. & Whitney, Gerald A., 2008. "A nonparametric test of weak separability and consumer preferences," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 275-281, December.
    17. Demuynck, Thomas & Hjertstrand, Per, 2019. "Samuelson's Approach to Revealed Preference Theory: Some Recent Advances," Working Paper Series 1274, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    18. Hjertstrand, Per, 2013. "A Simple Method to Account for Measurement Errors in Revealed Preference Tests," Working Paper Series 990, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    19. Elger, Thomas & Jones, Barry E., 2008. "Can rejections of weak separability be attributed to random measurement errors in the data?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 44-47, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • D1 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-05c10003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.