Freedom of Choice in Macroeconomic Forecasting
Different studies provide a surprisingly large variety of controversial conclusions about the forecasting power of an indicator, even when it is supposed to forecast the same time series. In this study, we aim to provide a thorough overview of linear forecasting techniques and draw conclusions useful for the identification of the predictive relationship between leading indicators and time series. In a case study for Germany, we forecast two possible representations of industrial production. Further on we consider a large variety of time-varying specifications. In a horse race with nine leading indicators plus an AR benchmark model, we demonstrate the variance of assessment across target variables and forecasting settings (50 per horizon). We show that it is nearly always possible to find situations in which one indicator proved to have better predicting power compared with another. Nevertheless, the freedom of choice can be useful to identify robust leading indicators. (JEL codes: C52, C53, E37) Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Ifo Institute for Economic Research, Munich. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: firstname.lastname@example.org, Oxford University Press.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 56 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://cesifo.oxfordjournals.org/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cesifo:v:56:y:2010:i:2:p:192-220. 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: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.