The log of gravity revisited
This article evaluates the performance of alternative estimation methods for gravity models with heteroscedasticity and zero trade values. Both problematic issues, recently addressed by Santos Silva and Tenreyro in an influential paper, are re-examined here. We use Monte Carlo simulations to compare the Pseudo Poisson Maximum Likelihood (PPML) estimator recommended by Santos Silva and Tenreyro, a Gamma Pseudo-Maximum-Likelihood (GPML), a Nonlinear Least Squares (NLS) estimator and a Feasible Generalized Least Squares (FGLS) estimator with more traditional techniques. Additionally, estimates of the gravity equation are obtained for three different data sets with the abovementioned methods. The results of the simulation study indicate that, although the PPML estimator is less affected by heteroscedasticity than others are, its performance is similar, in terms of bias and SEs, to the FGLS estimator performance, in particular for small samples. GPML presents however the lowest bias and SEs in the simulations without zero values. The results of the empirical estimations, using three different samples containing real data, indicate that the choice of estimator has to be made for each specific dataset. It is highly recommended to follow a model selection approach using a number of tests to select the more appropriate estimator for any application.
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): 45 (2013)
Issue (Month): 3 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAEC20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:45:y:2013:i:3:p:311-327. 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.