Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down at the end of May, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Bond Tiger <bond0910@ymail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation |

Date |
Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:49:14 -0700 (PDT) |

I have few more questions: (1) Can I use IV-GMM with dummy regressors (endogenous and exogenous)? (2) Also if instruments are defined as dichotomous (with 1 & 0 values) then can IV-GMM estimation or CUE give consistent & efficient estimates? My instruments are satisfying overidentifying restriction tests, however, they are appearing to be weak instruments. I have tested for weak instruments using Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistics and Stock-Yogo weak IV test critical values. (3) Do you think, since my instruments are dichotomous variables (and also the frequencies of 0s are more than 1s for these instruments) therefore this weak instrument problem is arising (even if the instruments are passing the overidentifying restriction tests)? Also I have tested for weak instrument robust inference (using Anderson-Rubin Wald test and Stock-Wright LM test statistics, to test significance of the endogenous regressors in the structural equation) and it also fails to reject null. What does this imply? Please help. Regards, Bond ----- Original Message ---- From: Bond Tiger <bond0910@ymail.com> To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 9:16:41 AM Subject: Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation Thank you so much. Your advice are really helpful and greatly appreciated. Regards, Bond ----- Original Message ---- From: Christopher Baum <kit.baum@bc.edu> To: "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> Sent: Mon, July 19, 2010 5:57:09 AM Subject: Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation On Jul 19, 2010, at 2:33 AM, Bond wrote: > Thank you very much Dr. Baum for your response. This is what I have understood > from your response, please correct me if I am wrong...... > > (1) It would not matter if I use system estimation technique but test my > instruments in a single equation setup. > > (2) I may not have to test for endogeneity of the regressors (Y1 and Y2) in the > single equation setup as by model specification itself I have considered the > regressors to be endogenous. > > I may consider estimating the equations simultaneously, otherwise if single > equation estimation is considered efficiency may be lost. Also I may have the > following situations: > > > (A) I may consider Seemingly Unrelated Regression (SUR) equations, in which >case > I may have different sets of explanatory variables in both the equations but >the > disturbance terms in both the equations may be correlated (may be some > unconsidered factors influence the disturbance terms in both the equations) and > then estimating all the equations simultaneously taking the covariance >structure > of the residuals into account would lead to efficient estimates of parameters. > Otherwise, single equation estimation would lead to inefficient estimates. > > (B) If I consider cross-equation parameter restrictions (in case both the > equations have common explanatory variables), then also the only way to test or > impose these restrictions is in a simultaneous equations setup. > > Therefore, not ruling out (A) and (B), I may finally estimate both the >equations > simultaneously. > > (3) So is there any code in STATA for SYSTEM ESTIMATION? Re point (1) above: not quite so, but if your instruments reject the overidentifying restrictions in single-equation estimation, stop there. Re point (2): in specifying (in any estimator) which variables you consider endogenous, you invoke the appropriate estimator. Re point (A): the discussion of SUR is irrelevant. SUR does not handle equations with endogenous regressors. It is OLS applied to each equation, taking account of the error correlations across equations. If any of the regressors are endogenous, SUR is inconsistent. Re point (B): just because the equations contain the same regressors, there is no implication that there are cross-equation restrictions unless theory suggests such. Re point (3): the only 'canned' code is that of reg3, which is a very old and severely limited implementation of three-stage least squares (it does not, for instance, allow for anything beyond iid errors: no robust, cluster, HAC, IV-GMM, etc.) Unless you can conclusively argue that your errors are iid, I would not use it. I would use single equation estimation with IV-GMM. Kit Kit Baum | Boston College Economics & DIW Berlin | http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html An Introduction to Stata Programming | http://www.stata-press.com/books/isp.html An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata | http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation***From:*Christopher Baum <kit.baum@bc.edu>

**Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation***From:*Bond Tiger <bond0910@ymail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: RE: RE: difference between robust and cluster option** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: summary statistics with mi multiple imputation** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Re: st: st. Simultaneous Equations Model & GMM Estimation** - Next by thread:
**st: tiny bug in cmp.ado [was:treatment effect estimation with an ordinal 1st step and a continuous 2nd step]** - Index(es):