Multiple Trend Breaks And The Unit-Root Hypothesis
Ever since Nelson and Plosser (1982) found evidence in favor of the unit-root hypothesis for 13 long-term annual macro series, observed unit - root behavior has been equated with persistence in the economy. Perron (1989) questioned this interpretation, arguing instead that the "observed" behavior may indicate failure to account for structural change. Zivot and Andrews (1992) restored confidence in the unit-root hypothesis by incorporating an endogenous break point into the specification. By allowing for the possibility of two endogenous break points, we find more evidence against the unit-root hypothesis than Zivot and Andrews, but less than Perron. © 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
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): 79 (1997)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/|
|Order Information:||Web: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journal-home.tcl?issn=00346535|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:restat:v:79:y:1997:i:2:p:212-218. 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: (Anna Pollock-Nelson)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.