IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v45y2013i3p311-327.html

The log of gravity revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2013. "The log of gravity revisited," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 311-327, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:45:y:2013:i:3:p:311-327
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2011.599786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2011.599786
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2011.599786?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    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:taf:applec:v:45:y:2013:i:3:p:311-327. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.