IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/emetrv/v29y2010i2p111-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Panel Unit Root Tests in the Presence of Cross-Sectional Dependencies: Comparison and Implications for Modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Gengenbach
  • Franz C. Palm
  • Jean-Pierre Urbain

Abstract

Several panel unit root tests that account for cross-section dependence using a common factor structure have been proposed in the literature recently. Pesaran's (2007) cross-sectionally augmented unit root tests are designed for cases where cross-sectional dependence is due to a single factor. The Moon and Perron (2004) tests which use defactored data are similar in spirit but can account for multiple common factors. The Bai and Ng (2004a) tests allow to determine the source of nonstationarity by testing for unit roots in the common factors and the idiosyncratic factors separately. Breitung and Das (2008) and Sul (2007) propose panel unit root tests when cross-section dependence is present possibly due to common factors, but the common factor structure is not fully exploited. This article makes four contributions: (1) it compares the testing procedures in terms of similarities and differences in the data generation process, tests, null, and alternative hypotheses considered, (2) using Monte Carlo results it compares the small sample properties of the tests in models with up to two common factors, (3) it provides an application which illustrates the use of the tests, and (4) finally, it discusses the use of the tests in modelling in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Gengenbach & Franz C. Palm & Jean-Pierre Urbain, 2010. "Panel Unit Root Tests in the Presence of Cross-Sectional Dependencies: Comparison and Implications for Modelling," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 111-145, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:29:y:2010:i:2:p:111-145 DOI: 10.1080/07474930903382125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07474930903382125
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Choi, In, 2001. "Unit root tests for panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 249-272, April.
    2. Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2002. "Determining the Number of Factors in Approximate Factor Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, pages 191-221.
    3. Banerjee, A. & Marcellino, M. & Osbat, C., 2000. "Some Cautions on the Use of Panel Methods for Integrated Series of Macro-economic Data," Economics Working Papers eco2000/20, European University Institute.
    4. Lyhagen, Johan, 2000. "Why not use standard panel unit root test for testing PPP," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 413, Stockholm School of Economics.
    5. Moon, H.R.Hyungsik Roger & Perron, Benoit, 2004. "Testing for a unit root in panels with dynamic factors," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 81-126, September.
    6. Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2004. "A PANIC Attack on Unit Roots and Cointegration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1127-1177, July.
    7. Hasan Bakhshi & Ben Martin & Tony Yates, 2002. "How uncertain are the welfare costs of inflation?," Bank of England working papers 152, Bank of England.
    8. Peter C. B. Phillips & Donggyu Sul, 2003. "Dynamic panel estimation and homogeneity testing under cross section dependence *," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 6(1), pages 217-259, June.
    9. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, pages 817-858.
    10. Andrews, Donald W K & Monahan, J Christopher, 1992. "An Improved Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator," Econometrica, Econometric Society, pages 953-966.
    11. Chang, Yoosoon, 2002. "Nonlinear IV unit root tests in panels with cross-sectional dependency," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, pages 261-292.
    12. Oh, Keun-Yeob, 1996. "Purchasing power parity and unit root tests using panel data," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 405-418, June.
    13. Anindya Banerjee & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2004. "Some cautions on the use of panel methods for integrated series of macroeconomic data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 7(2), pages 322-340, December.
    14. Flores, Renato & Jorion, Philippe & Preumont, Pierre-Yves & Szafarz, Ariane, 1999. "Multivariate unit root tests of the PPP hypothesis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, pages 335-353.
    15. Aznar, Antonio & Salvador, Manuel, 2002. "Selecting The Rank Of The Cointegration Space And The Form Of The Intercept Using An Information Criterion," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(04), pages 926-947, August.
    16. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    17. Flores, Renato & Jorion, Philippe & Preumont, Pierre-Yves & Szafarz, Ariane, 1999. "Multivariate unit root tests of the PPP hypothesis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, pages 335-353.
    18. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
    19. Anindya Banerjee & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2005. "Testing for PPP: Should we use panel methods?," Empirical Economics, Springer, pages 77-91.
    20. Anindya Banerjee & Massimiliano Marcellino & Chiara Osbat, 2005. "Testing for PPP: Should we use panel methods?," Empirical Economics, Springer, pages 77-91.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:emetrv:v:29:y:2010:i:2:p:111-145. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/LECR20 .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.