IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/imk/studie/54-2017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Vergleichende Evaluation der Konjunkturprognosen des Instituts für Makroökonomie und Konjunkturforschung an der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung für den Zeitraum 2005-2014

Author

Listed:
  • Ulrich Fritsche
  • Artur Tarassow

Abstract

Es werden die makroökonomischen Prognosen der acht großen deutschen Forschungsinstitute evaluiert. Die Datenbasis umfasst die publizierten Prognosen für 11 Aggregate für den Zeitraum 2005 bis 2014. Zunächst wird jede Variable separat mittels aktueller Evaluationsmethoden untersucht. Diese umfassen: Theil'sches U, Diebold-Mariano-Test, regressionsbasierte sowie nicht-parametrische Tests auf Rationalität, Bestimmung einer asymmetrischen Prognoseverlustfunktion und den dazugehörigen verallgemeinerten Test auf Rationalität, Richtungsänderungstest. Anschließend wird ein Gesamtsieger mittels des multivariaten Mahalanobis-Distanzmaßes ermittelt. Dieser Ansatz untersucht mehrere Variablen gemeinsam auf ihre empirische Kohärenz. Die quantitative Prognosegüte ist sowohl über die Institute wie über die Variablen hinweg heterogen. Für die meisten berücksichtigten Aggregate - insbesondere für Wirtschaftswachstum (BIP) und Inflationsrate - und über die meisten Institute hinweg betrachtet ist auch eine Prognoseverbesserung gegenüber einer naiven Prognose darstellbar. Allerdings ist ein gewisses Problem mit der Prognosegüte von privaten Konsumausgaben sowie der Arbeitslosenquote sichtbar. Es gibt kaum Hinweise auf Verletzung des Rationalitätskriteriums für das BIP, die Inflationsrate, die Ausrüstungsinvestitionen, die Ein- und Ausfuhren sowie die Arbeitslosenquote. Schwierigkeiten bei den Wendepunktprognosen gibt es für die Inflationsrate, die Konsumausgaben des Staates und der privaten Haushalte, die Bauinvestitionen sowie die Arbeitslosenquote. Im Hinblick auf die Form der Verlustfunktion kann für die Wachstumsrate des BIP oder die Inflationsrate keine Asymmetrie diagnostiziert werden. Bei der multivariaten Prognosegüte ergeben sich überraschend deutliche Unterschiede bezüglich der kohärenten "Stories" zwischen den Instituten. Das IMK schneidet hier mit dem ifo Institut sowie dem IWH zusammen am besten ab. Alle Daten und Computerroutinen sind öffentlich verfügbar.

Suggested Citation

  • Ulrich Fritsche & Artur Tarassow, 2017. "Vergleichende Evaluation der Konjunkturprognosen des Instituts für Makroökonomie und Konjunkturforschung an der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung für den Zeitraum 2005-2014," IMK Studies 54-2017, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:imk:studie:54-2017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.boeckler.de/pdf/p_imk_study_54_2017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    2. Hans Christian Müller-Dröge & Tara M. Sinclair & H.O. Stekler, 2014. "Evaluating Forecasts of a Vector of Variables: a German Forecasting Competition," CAMA Working Papers 2014-55, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    3. Fildes, Robert & Stekler, Herman, 2002. "The state of macroeconomic forecasting," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 435-468, December.
    4. Stekler, H O, 1972. "An Analysis of Turning Point Forecasts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(4), pages 724-729, September.
    5. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    6. Graham Elliott & Allan Timmermann & Ivana Komunjer, 2005. "Estimation and Testing of Forecast Rationality under Flexible Loss," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 1107-1125.
    7. Fildes, Robert & Stekler, Herman, 2002. "Reply to the comments on 'The state of macroeconomic forecasting'," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 503-505, December.
    8. Campbell, Bryan & Ghysels, Eric, 1995. "Federal Budget Projections: A Nonparametric Assessment of Bias and Efficiency," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 17-31, February.
    9. Jacob A. Mincer, 1969. "Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number minc69-1.
    10. Ulrich Fritsche & Jörg Döpke, 2006. "Treffgenauigkeit, Rationalität und Streuung von Konjunkturprognosen für Deutschland," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 75(2), pages 34-53.
    11. Nordhaus, William D, 1987. "Forecasting Efficiency: Concepts and Applications," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(4), pages 667-674, November.
    12. Batchelor, Roy & Peel, David A., 1998. "Rationality testing under asymmetric loss," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 49-54, October.
    13. Döhrn Roland & Schmidt Christoph M., 2011. "Information or Institution?: On the Determinants of Forecast Accuracy," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 231(1), pages 9-27, February.
    14. Dufour, J.M., 1979. "Rank Tests for Serial Dependence," Cahiers de recherche 7815, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    15. repec:jns:jbstat:v:206:y:1989:i:6:p:544-560:n:3 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Francis X. Diebold & Jose A. Lopez, 1995. "Forecast evaluation and combination," Research Paper 9525, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    17. Gebhardt Kirschgässner & Marcel Savioz, 2001. "Monetary Policy and Forecasts for Real GDP Growth: An Empirical Investigation for the Federal Republic of Germany," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 2(4), pages 339-365, November.
    18. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2011. "Rethinking Macroeconomics: What Failed, And How To Repair It," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 591-645, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jörg Döpke & Ulrich Fritsche & Gabi Waldhof, 2017. "Theories, techniques and the formation of German business cycle forecasts: Evidence from a survey among professional forecasters," Working Papers 2017-002, The George Washington University, Department of Economics, Research Program on Forecasting.
    2. Jörg Döpke & Ulrich Fritsche & Gabi Waldhof, 2017. "Theories, techniques and the formation of German business cycle forecasts: Evidence from a survey of professional forecasters," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201701, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    3. Jörg Döpke & Ulrich Fritsche & Karsten Müller, 2018. "Has Macroeconomic Forecasting changed after the Great Recession? - Panel-based Evidence on Accuracy and Forecaster Behaviour from Germany," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201803, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    4. repec:jns:jbstat:v:239:y:2019:i:2:p:203-241:n:6 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:imk:studie:54-2017. 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: (Sabine Nemitz). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/imkhbde.html .

    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.