IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Unit Roots, Level Shifts, and Trend Breaks in Per Capita Output: A Robust Evaluation

  • Mohitosh Kejriwal
  • Claude Lopez

Determining whether per capita output can be characterized by a stochastic trend is complicated by the fact that infrequent breaks in trend can bias standard unit root tests towards nonrejection of the unit root hypothesis. The bulk of the existing literature has focused on the application of unit root tests allowing for structural breaks in the trend function under the trend stationary alternative but not under the unit root null. These tests, however, provide little information regarding the existence and number of trend breaks. Moreover, these tests suffer from serious power and size distortions due to the asymmetric treatment of breaks under the null and alternative hypotheses. This article estimates the number of breaks in trend employing procedures that are robust to the unit root/stationarity properties of the data. Our analysis of the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) for Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries thereby permits a robust classification of countries according to the “growth shift,” “level shift,” and “linear trend” hypotheses. In contrast to the extant literature, unit root tests conditional on the presence or absence of breaks do not provide evidence against the unit root hypothesis.

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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07474938.2012.690689
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 under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Econometric Reviews.

Volume (Year): 32 (2013)
Issue (Month): 8 (November)
Pages: 892-927

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:32:y:2013:i:8:p:892-927
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/LECR20

Order Information: Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/LECR20

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.:

as in new window
  1. Timothy J. Vogelsang, 1998. "Trend Function Hypothesis Testing in the Presence of Serial Correlation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 123-148, January.
  2. Campbell, J.Y. & Perron, P., 1991. "Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomics should know about unit roots," Papers 360, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  3. Jushan Bai, 1997. "Estimation Of A Change Point In Multiple Regression Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 551-563, November.
  4. Pierre Perron & Tomoyoshi Yabu, 2007. "Testing for Shifts in Trend with an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2007-025, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  5. Andrews, Donald W K & Ploberger, Werner, 1994. "Optimal Tests When a Nuisance Parameter Is Present Only under the Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1383-1414, November.
  6. Chris Murray & Charles Nelson, 1998. "The Uncertain Trend in U.S. GDP," Working Papers 0074, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
  7. Harvey, David I. & Leybourne, Stephen J. & Taylor, A.M. Robert, 2010. "Robust methods for detecting multiple level breaks in autocorrelated time series," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 157(2), pages 342-358, August.
  8. Robin L. Lumsdaine & David H. Papell, 1997. "Multiple Trend Breaks And The Unit-Root Hypothesis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 212-218, May.
  9. Kilian, L. & Ohanian, L.E., 1999. "Unit Roots, Trend Breaks and Transitory Dynamics: A Macroeconomic Perspective," Papers 99-02, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
  10. Harvey, David I. & Leybourne, Stephen J. & Taylor, A.M. Robert, 2007. "A simple, robust and powerful test of the trend hypothesis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 1302-1330, December.
  11. Dan Ben-David & Robin L. Lumsdaine & David H. Papell, 1998. "Unit Roots, Postwar Slowdowns and Long-Run Growth: Evidence from Two Structural Breaks," NBER Working Papers 6397, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Kim, Dukpa & Perron, Pierre, 2009. "Unit root tests allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time under both the null and alternative hypotheses," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 1-13, January.
  13. Ben-David, Dan & Papell, David H., 1995. "The great wars, the great crash, and steady state growth: Some new evidence about an old stylized fact," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 453-475, December.
  14. Mohitosh Kejriwal & Pierre Perron, 2009. "A Sequential Procedure to Determine the Number of Breaks in Trend with an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series wp2009-005, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  15. Eric Zivot & Donald W.K. Andrews, 1990. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 944, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  16. Perron, P, 1988. "The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock And The Unit Root Hypothesis," Papers 338, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  17. Graham Elliott & Thomas J. Rothenberg & James H. Stock, 1992. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," NBER Technical Working Papers 0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Lhomme Jean, 1961. "Rostow (W.W.) - The stages of economic growth, a non-communist manifesto," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 12(5), pages 830-831.
  19. David I. Harvey & Stephen J. Leybourne & A.M. Robert Taylor, . "Simple, Robust and Powerful Tests of the Breaking Trend Hypothesis," Discussion Papers 06/11, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
  20. Pierre Perron & Tomoyoshi Yabu, 2005. "Estimating Deterministric Trends with an Integrated or Stationary Noise Component," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2005-037, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  21. Perron, Pierre & Zhu, Xiaokang, 2005. "Structural breaks with deterministic and stochastic trends," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 129(1-2), pages 65-119.
  22. Vogelsang, T.J. & Perron, P., 1994. "Additional Tests for a Unit Root Allowing for a Break in the Trend Function at an Unknown Time," Cahiers de recherche 9422, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
  23. Perron, P. & Bai, J., 1995. "Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes," Cahiers de recherche 9552, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  24. Nunes, Luis C & Newbold, Paul & Kuan, Chung-Ming, 1997. "Testing for Unit Roots with Breaks: Evidence on the Great Crash and the Unit Root Hypothesis Reconsidered," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 59(4), pages 435-48, November.
  25. Perron, P., 1990. "Further Evidence On Breaking Trend Functions In Macroeconomics Variables," Papers 350, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
  26. Zelhorst, Dick & de Haan, Jakob, 1995. "Testing for a Break in Output: New International Evidence," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 357-62, April.
  27. Balke, Nathan S. & Fomby, Thomas B., 1991. "Shifting trends, segmented trends, and infrequent permanent shocks," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 61-85, August.
  28. Ben-David, Dan & Papell, David H, 2000. "Some Evidence on the Continuity of the Growth Process among the G-7 Countries," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(2), pages 320-30, April.
  29. Ruxandra Prodan, 2004. "Potential Pitfalls in Determining Multiple Structural Changes with an Application to Purchasing Power Parity," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 90, Econometric Society.
  30. Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 821-56, July.
  31. Banerjee, Anindya & Lumsdaine, Robin L & Stock, James H, 1992. "Recursive and Sequential Tests of the Unit-Root and Trend-Break Hypotheses: Theory and International Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 271-87, July.
  32. Junsoo Lee & Mark C. Strazicich, 2003. "Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1082-1089, November.
  33. Darne, Olivier & Diebolt, Claude, 2004. "Unit roots and infrequent large shocks: new international evidence on output," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1449-1465, October.
  34. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 2001. "LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1519-1554, November.
  35. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-37, October.
  36. David Harris & David I. Harvey & Stephen J. Leybourne & A. M. Robert Taylor, 2007. "Testing for a unit root in the presence of a possible break in trend," Discussion Papers 07/04, University of Nottingham, Granger Centre for Time Series Econometrics.
  37. Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre & Dukpa Kim & Pierre Perron, 2007. "GLS-based unit root tests with multiple structural breaks both under the null and the alternative hypotheses," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series wp2008-019, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  38. Giuseppe Cavaliere & David I. Harvey & Stephen J. Leybourne & A. M. Robert Taylor, 2009. "Testing for unit roots in the presence of a possible break in trend and non-stationary volatility," Discussion Papers 09/05, University of Nottingham, Granger Centre for Time Series Econometrics.
  39. Raj, Baldev, 1992. "International Evidence on Persistence in Output in the Presence of an Episodic Change," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(3), pages 281-93, July-Sept.
  40. Lawrence J. Christiano, 1988. "Searching For a Break in GNP," NBER Working Papers 2695, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  41. Tai-leung Chong, Terence, 1995. "Partial parameter consistency in a misspecified structural change model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 351-357, October.
  42. Papell, David H & Prodan, Ruxandra, 2004. "The Uncertain Unit Root in U.S. Real GDP: Evidence with Restricted and Unrestricted Structural Change," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(3), pages 423-27, June.
  43. Lee, Junsoo & Strazicich, Mark C, 2001. " Break Point Estimation and Spurious Rejections with Endogenous Unit Root Tests," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 63(5), pages 535-58, December.
  44. Bradley, Michael D & Jansen, Dennis W, 1995. "Unit Roots and Infrequent Large Shocks: New International Evidence on Output Growth," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 27(3), pages 867-93, August.
  45. Roy, Anindya & Fuller, Wayne A, 2001. "Estimation for Autoregressive Time Series with a Root Near 1," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 482-93, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:32:y:2013:i:8:p:892-927. 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.