Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:45:01.811Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transformed-likelihood estimators for dynamic panel models with a very small T

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2020

Mark Pickup Open the ORCID record for Mark Pickup [Opens in a new window]  and
Vincent Hopkins
Mark Pickup
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
Vincent Hopkins*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
*
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Conventional OLS fixed-effects and GLS random-effects estimators of dynamic models that control for individual-effects are known to be biased when applied to short panel data (T ≤ 10). GMM estimators are the most used alternative but are known to have drawbacks. Transformed-likelihood estimators are unused in political science. Of these, orthogonal reparameterization estimators are only tangentially referred to in any discipline. We introduce these estimators and test their performance, demonstrating that the unused orthogonal reparameterization estimator in particular performs very well and is an improvement on the commonly used GMM estimators. When T and/or N are small, it provides efficiency gains and overcomes the issues GMM estimators encounter in the estimation of long-run effects when the coefficient on the lagged dependent variable is close to one.

Keywords

Bayesiandynamicindividual effectspanel datatransformed-likelihoodunobserved heterogeneity
Type
Original Article
Information
Political Science Research and Methods , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 2022 , pp. 333 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the European Political Science Association

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.)

References

Anderson, T and Hsiao, C (1982) Formulation and estimation of a dynamic models using panel data. Journal of Econometrics 18, 47–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arellano, M and Bond, S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies 58, 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arellano, M, Bond, S and Bover, O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics 68, 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balestra, P and Nerlove, M (1966) Pooling cross section and time series data in the estimation of a dynamic model: the demand for natural gas. Econometrica 34, 585–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N and Katz, J (1996) Nuisance vs. substance: specifying and estimating time-series–cross-section models. Political Analysis 6, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N and Katz, J (2001) Throwing out the baby with the bath water: a comment on green, yoon and kim. International Organization 55, 487–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N and Katz, JN (2011) Modeling Dynamics in Time-Series–Cross-Section Political Economy Data. Annual Review of Political Science 14, 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, A and Jones, K (2015) Explaining fixed effects: random effects modelling of time-series cross-sectional and panel data. Political Science Research and Methods 3, 113–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhargava, A and Sargan, J (1983) Estimating dynamic random effects models from panel data covering short time periods. Econometrica 51, 1635–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundell, R and Bond, S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics 87, 115–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundell, R, Bond, S and Windmeijer, F (2000) Estimation in dynamic panel data models: improving on the performance of the standard gmm estimator. In Baltagi, BH (ed.), Nonstationary Panels Cointegrating Panels and Dynamic Panels. New York, NY: Elsevier Press, pp 53–92.10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15003-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, S and Windmeijer, F (2002) Projection estimators for autoregressive panel data models. Econometrics Journal 5, 457–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, T and Linzer, D (2015) Should I Use Fixed or Random Effects?. Political Science Research and Methods 3(2), 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, DR and Reid, N (1987) Parameter Orthogonality and Approximate Conditional Inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 49(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doran, HE and Schmidt, P (2006) GMM Estimators with Improved Finite Sample Properties Using Principal Components of the Weighting Matrix, with an Application to the Dynamic Panel Data Model. Journal of Econometrics 133, 387–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, S (2008) Linear panel analysis. In Menard, S (ed.), Handbook of Longitudinal Research. New York, NY: Elsevier Press.Google Scholar
Green, DP, Kim, SY and Yoon, DH (2001) Dirty pool. International Organization 55, 441–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, J and Taylor, W (1981) Panel data and unobservable individual effects. Econometrica 49, 1377–1398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsiao, C (2014) Analysis of Panel Data, 3rd Edn. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsiao, C, Pesaran, M and Tahmiscioglu, A (2002) Maximum likelihood estimation of fixed effects dynamic panel data models covering short time periods. Journal of Econometrics 109, 107–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiviet, J, Pleus, M and Poldermans, R (2017) Accuracy and efficiency of various gmm inference techniques in dynamic micro panel data models. Econometrics 14, 1–54.Google Scholar
Kripfganz, S (2016) xtdpdqml: quasi-maximum likelihood estimation of linear dynamic short-t panel data models. Stata Journal 16, 1013–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, T (2000) The incidental parameter problem since 1948. Journal of Econometrics 95, 391–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, T (2002) Orthogonal parameters and panel data. The Review of Economic Studies 69, 647–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundlak, Y (1978) On the Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data. Econometrica 46(1), 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nerlove, M (1967) Experimental evidence on the estimation of dynamic economic relations from a time series of cross sections. Economic Studies Quarterly 18, 359–382.Google Scholar
Neyman, J and Scott, E (1948) Consistent estimation from partially consistent observations. Econometrica 16, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickell, SJ (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica 49, 1417–1426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesaran, MH (2015) Time Series and Panel Data Econometrics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickup, M, Gustafson, P, Cubranic, D and Evans, G (2017) Orthopanels: an R package for estimating a dynamic panel model with fixed effects using the orthogonal reparameterization approach. The R Journal 9, 60–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plümper, T and Troeger, V (2019) Not so harmless after all: the fixed-effects model. Political Analysis 27, 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roodman, D (2009) A note on the theme of too many instruments. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 71, 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbaum, P (2005) Heterogeneity and Causality. The American Statistician 59(2), 147–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shor, B, Bafumi, J and Keele, L (2007) A Bayesian Multilevel Modeling Approach to Time-Series Cross-Sectional Data. Political Analysis 15, 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
StataCorp (2017) Stata Longitudinal Data/Panel Data Reference Manual Release 15. College Station, Tx: Stata Press Publication.Google Scholar
Stock, J, Wright, J and Yogo, M (2002) A survey of weak instruments and weak identification in generalized method of moments. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 20, 518–529.10.1198/073500102288618658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wawro, G (2002) Estimating dynamic panel data models in political science. Political Analysis 10, 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S and Butler, D (2007) A lot more to do: the sensitivity of time-series cross-section analyses to simple alternative specifications. Political Analysis 15, 101–123.10.1093/pan/mpl012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windmeijer, F (2005) The finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step gmm estimators. Journal of Econometrics 126, 25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, 2nd Edn. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J (2013) Introductory Econometrics: a Modern Approach, 5th Edn. Mason, OH: South-Western.Google Scholar
Zhu, L (2012) Panel data analysis in public administration: substantive and statistical considerations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23, 395–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Pickup and Hopkins supplementary material

Pickup and Hopkins supplementary material

Download Pickup and Hopkins supplementary material(File)
File 155.7 KB
Supplementary material: Link

Pickup and Hopkins Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/YIQKN8
Link