Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T03:50:46.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON THE RECOVERABILITY OF FORECASTERS’ PREFERENCES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2012

Robert P. Lieli  and
Maxwell B. Stinchcombe
Robert P. Lieli*
Affiliation:
Central European University and Magyar Nemzeti Bank
Maxwell B. Stinchcombe
Affiliation:
University of Texas–Austin
*
*Address correspondence to Robert P. Lieli, Department of Economics, Central European University, Nádor u. 9, 1051 Budapest, Hungary; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We study the problem of identifying a forecaster’s loss function from observations on forecasts, realizations, and the forecaster’s information set. Essentially different loss functions can lead to the same forecasts in all situations, though within the class of all continuous loss functions, this is strongly nongeneric. With the small set of exceptional cases ruled out, generic nonparametric preference recovery is theoretically possible, but identification depends critically on the amount of variation in the conditional distributions of the process being forecast. There exist processes with sufficient variability to guarantee identification, and much of this variation is also necessary for a process to have universal identifying power. We also briefly address the case in which the econometrician does not fully observe the conditional distributions used by the forecaster, and in this context we provide a practically useful set identification result for loss functions used in forecasting binary variables.

Type
Articles
Information
Econometric Theory , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , June 2013 , pp. 517 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We thank David Hendry, Ivana Komunjer, Michael McCracken, Ulrich Müller, and two anonymous referees for useful comments. All errors are our responsibility.

References

Anderson, R.M. & Zame, W.R. (2001) Genericity with infinitely many parameters. Advances in Theoretical Economics 1, 1–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baire, R. (1899) Sur les Fonctions de Variables Réelles (thèse). Annali di Matematica Pura ed Applicata (ser. 3) 3, 1–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capistran, C. & Timmermann, A. (2009) Disagreement and biases in inflation expectations. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 41, 365–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbae, D., Stinchcombe, M.B., & Zeman, J. (2009) An Introduction to Mathematical Analysis for Economic Theory and Econometrics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Elliott, G., Komunjer, I., & Timmermann, A. (2003) Estimating Loss Function Parameters. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Elliott, G., Komunjer, I., & Timmermann, A. (2005) Estimation and testing of forecast rationality under flexible loss. Review of Economic Studies 72, 1107–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, G., Komunjer, I., & Timmermann, A. (2008) Biases in macroeconomic forecasts: Irrationality or asymmetric loss. Journal of the European Economic Association 6, 122–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, C.W.J. (1969) Prediction with a generalized cost of error function. Operational Research Quarterly 20, 199–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, C.W.J. & Machina, M. (2006) Forecasting and decision theory. In Elliott, G., Granger, C.W.J., & Timmermann, A. (eds.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Komunjer, I. & Vuong, Q. (2010) Semiparametric efficiency bound in time series models for conditional quantiles. Econometric Theory 26, 383–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mincer, J. & Zarnowitz, V. (1969) The evaluation of economic forecasts. In Mincer, J. (ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Morris, S. & Ui, T. (2004) Best response equivalence. Games and Economic Behavior 49, 260–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, A.J. & Timmermann, A. (2005) Testable Implications of Forecast Optimality. Working paper, Department of Economics, London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Patton, A.J. & Timmermann, A. (2007) Testing forecast optimality under unknown loss. Journal of the American Statistical Association 102, 1172–1184.Google Scholar