Comparing Theories Of Endogenous Protection: Bayesian Comparison Of Tobit Models Using Gibbs Sampling Output
Bayesian inference and model comparisons are easily performed quite accurately using Gibbs sampling, even if (1) the likelihood is analytically intractable and (2) nonstandard prior probability density functions (pdfs) are required. In this study Bayesian model comparisons are performed among five competing theories of endogenous protection. Tariff and nontariff barrier data from 1983 between the United States and five OECD partner countries--Japan, France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom--are used in the analysis. Posterior odds based on two priors show special-interest models to be more likely than other models in determining U.S. protection. © 1998 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): 80 (1998)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
|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:80:y:1998:i:1:p:128-140. 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: (Karie Kirkpatrick)
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.