Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The Mundlak Approach in the Spatial Durbin Panel Data Model

Contents:

Author Info

  • Nicolas Debarsy

Abstract

This paper extends the Mundlak approach to the spatial Durbin panel data model (SDM) to help the applied researcher to determine the adequacy of the random effects specification in this setup. We propose a likelihood ratio (LR) test that assesses the significance of the correlation between regressors and individual effects. By contrast to the Hausman test, the Mundlak approach identifies (to some extent) the regressors correlated with individual effects. The second advantage is that once the correlation with individual effects has been modelled through an auxiliary regression, the random effects specification provides consistent estimators and the effect of time-constant variables can be estimated. Some Monte Carlo simulations study the properties of this proposed LR test in small samples and show that in some cases, it has a better behaviour than the Hausman test. We finally illustrate the usefulness of the extended Mundlak approach by estimating a house price model where some of the price determinants are time-constant. We show that ignoring the endogeneity of regressors with respect to individual effects leads to unreliable estimated parameters while results obtained using the Mundlak approach and the fixed effects specification are similar (concerning time-varying variables), implying that correlation between regressors and individual effects is well captured. RÉSUMÉ la présente communication applique l'approche de Mundlak au modèle de données spatiales de Durbin pour aider le chercheur appliqué à déterminer dans quelle mesure la spécification des effets aléatoires est adéquate dans cette configuration. Nous proposons un test de ratio de vraisemblance évaluant l'importance de la corrélation entre régresseurs et effets individuels. Contrairement au test de Hausman, l'approche de Mundlak identifie (dans une certaine mesure) les régresseurs corrélés à des effets individuels. Le deuxième avantage est que lorsque la corrélation avec les effets individuels a été modélisée via une régression auxiliaire, la spécification des effets aléatoires fournit des estimateurs convergents, et il est alors possible d’évaluer l'effet de variables constantes dans le temps. Des simulations Monte Carlo étudient les propriétés de ce test de ratio de vraisemblance proposé dans des échantillons de taille finie, et indiquent que, dans certains cas, il présente un meilleur comportement que le test de Hausman. Nous illustrons enfin l'utilité de l'approche étendue de Mundlak en évaluant un modèle de prix des maisons, dans lequel certains déterminants des prix sont constants dans le temps. Nous montrons que si on ne prend pas en compte l'endogénéité des régresseurs par rapport aux effets individuels, on obtient des paramétres estimés non fiables, alors que les résultats obtenus avec l'approche de Mundlak et la spécification des effets fixes sont similaires (sur le plan des variables variant dans le temps), ce qui implique que la corrélation entre régresseurs et effets individuels est bien captée. EXTRACTO Este estudio extiende el planteamiento Mundlak al modelo espacial de datos de panel (SDM) Durbin para ayudar al investigador aplicado a determinar la idoneidad de la especificación de efectos aleatorios dentro de esta configuración. Proponemos una prueba de relación de la probabilidad (LR) que evalúa la significancia de la correlación entre regresores y efectos individuales. En contraste con la prueba Hausman, el planteamiento Mundlak identifica (hasta cierto punto) los regresores correlacionados con efectos individuales. La segunda ventaja es que, una vez modelada la correlación con efectos individuales a través de una regresión auxiliar, la especificación de efectos aleatorios proporciona estimadores consistentes y puede estimarse el efecto de las variables constantes en el tiempo. Algunas simulaciones de Monte Carlo estudian las propiedades de esta prueba LR propuesta en muestras pequeñas y demuestran que, en algunos casos, se comporta mejor que la prueba Hausman. Finalmente, ilustramos la utilidad del planteamiento Mundlak ampliado estimando el precio de una vivienda donde varios determinantes del precio son constantes en el tiempo. Mostramos que ignorar la endogeneidad de los regresores con respecto a efectos individuales conduce a parámetros estimados no fiables, mientras que los resultados obtenidos mediante el planteamiento Mundlak y la especificación de efectos fijos son similares (en lo concerniente a variables que varan en el tiempo), sugiriendo que la correlación entre regresores y efectos individuales se ha capturado satisfactoriamente

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17421772.2011.647059
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Spatial Economic Analysis.

Volume (Year): 7 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
Pages: 109-131

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:taf:specan:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:109-131

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RSEA20

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RSEA20

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Badi H. Baltagi & Yin-Fang Yen, 2014. "Hospital Treatment Rates and Spillover Effects: Does Ownership Matter?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4664, CESifo Group Munich.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:specan:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:109-131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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