Testing for Separation in Agricultural Household Models and Unobservable Individual Effects: A Note
When market structure is complete, factor demands by households will be independent of their characteristics, and households will take their production decisions as if they were profit-maximizing firms. This observation constitutes the basis for one of the most popular empirical tests for complete markets, commonly known as the 'separation' hypothesis. In this paper, we show that all existing tests for separation using panel data are potentially biased towards rejecting the null-hypothesis of complete markets, because of the failure to adequately control for unobservable individual effects. Since the variable on which the test for separation is based cannot be identified in most panel datasets following the usual covariance transformations, and is likely to be correlated with the individual effect, neither the within nor the variance-components procedures are able to solve the problem. We show that the Hausman-Taylor (1981) estimator, in which the impact of covariates that are invariant along one dimension of a panel can be identified through the use of covariance transformations of other included variables that are orthogonal to the individual effects as instruments, provides a simple solution. We furnish an empirical illustration in which separation —and thus the null of complete markets— is strongly rejected using the standard approach, but is not rejected once correlated unobservable individual effects are controlled for using the Hausman-Taylor instrument set.
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.:
- Nabli, Mustapha K. & Nugent, Jeffrey B., 1989. "The New Institutional Economics and its applicability to development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 17(9), pages 1333-1347, September.
- Bowlus, Audra J. & Sicular, Terry, 2003. "Moving toward markets? Labor allocation in rural China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 561-583, August.
- Benjamin, Dwayne, 1992. "Household Composition, Labor Markets, and Labor Demand: Testing for Separation in Agricultural Household Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 287-322, March.
- Hausman, Jerry, 2015.
"Specification tests in econometrics,"
Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
- Hausman, Jerry A, 1978. "Specification Tests in Econometrics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1251-1271, November.
- J. A. Hausman, 1976. "Specification Tests in Econometrics," Working papers 185, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A., 1986. "Errors in variables in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 93-118, February.
- Zvi Griliches & Jerry A. Hausman, 1984. "Errors in Variables in Panel Data," NBER Technical Working Papers 0037, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- H. Baltagi, Badi & Heun Song, Seuck & Cheol Jung, Byoung, 2001. "The unbalanced nested error component regression model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 357-381, April.
- Amemiya, Takeshi & MaCurdy, Thomas E, 1986. "Instrumental-Variable Estimation of an Error-Components Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 869-880, July.
- Breusch, Trevor S & Mizon, Grayham E & Schmidt, Peter, 1989. "Efficient Estimation Using Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 695-700, May. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpmi:0510007. 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: (EconWPA)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.