In the existing literature, the duration of trade has typically been analyzed using either descriptive Kaplan-Meier methods or a Cox regression approach. While the latter has the advantage of allowing for explanatory variables, it is designed for the analysis of continuous duration times, whereas trade flows are observed for discrete time intervals. The purpose of this paper is to point out why it is inappropriate to analyze the duration of trade with continuous- rather than discrete-time models, and to illustrate the implications of the model choice in an empirical application to EU trade. Briefly, there are three major problems with the continuous-time models. First, such models face problems in the presence of many tied duration times, with a risk of biased estimation coefficients and standard errors. Second, it is very difficult to properly control for unobserved heterogeneity, which can cause spurious duration dependencies, as well as parameter biases. Third, the Cox model – which, by far, is the most commonly used model – imposes the restrictive and empirically questionable assumption of proportional hazards. By contrast, discrete-time models, such as probit, logit and complementary log-log models have no difficulty dealing with ties; unobserved heterogeneity can easily be controlled for; and one is not forced to assume proportional hazards. Applying both continuous- and discrete-time models to detailed data on imports to EU15 countries from 139 exporters for the period 1962-2006, we find evidence in support of the arguments against the Cox model, and conclude that researchers that use a Cox model might run a serious risk of getting incorrect results.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Lund University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number
2009:12.
Length: 35 pages Date of creation: 17 Aug 2009 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2009_012
Contact details of provider: Postal: Department of Economics, School of Economics and Management, Lund University, Box 7082, S-220 07 Lund,Sweden Phone: +46 +46 222 0000 Fax: +46 +46 2224613 Web page: http://www.nek.lu.se/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (David Edgerton).
Find related papers by JEL classification: C41 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Duration Analysis F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Country and Industry Studies of Trade
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
J Bradford Jensen & Andrew B Bernard, 2001.
"Why Some Firms Export,"
Working Papers
01-05, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
[Downloadable!]
Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen, 2001.
"Why Some Firms Export,"
NBER Working Papers
8349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)