Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-frvt8 Total loading time: 0.343 Render date: 2022-09-25T14:46:11.257Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED INDIRECT INFERENCE IN HETEROSKEDASTIC SPATIAL MODELS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2021

Maria Kyriacou*
Affiliation:
University of Southampton
Peter C.B. Phillips
Affiliation:
Yale University University of Auckland University of Southampton Singapore Management University
Francesca Rossi
Affiliation:
University of Verona
*
Address correspondence to Maria Kyriacou, Department of Economics, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; e-mail: m.kyriacou@soton.ac.uk.
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

HTML view is not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Spatial units typically vary over many of their characteristics, introducing potential unobserved heterogeneity which invalidates commonly used homoskedasticity conditions. In the presence of unobserved heteroskedasticity, methods based on the quasi-likelihood function generally produce inconsistent estimates of both the spatial parameter and the coefficients of the exogenous regressors. A robust generalized method of moments estimator as well as a modified likelihood method have been proposed in the literature to address this issue. The present paper constructs an alternative indirect inference (II) approach which relies on a simple ordinary least squares procedure as its starting point. Heteroskedasticity is accommodated by utilizing a new version of continuous updating that is applied within the II procedure to take account of the parameterization of the variance–covariance matrix of the disturbances. Finite-sample performance of the new estimator is assessed in a Monte Carlo study. The approach is implemented in an empirical application to house price data in the Boston area, where it is found that spatial effects in house price determination are much more significant under robustification to heterogeneity in the equation errors.

Type
ARTICLES
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Footnotes

We thank the Co-Editor, Dennis Kristensen, and two anonymous referees for helpful comments and suggestions that have improved the quality of the paper. Phillips acknowledges research support from the NSF under Grant No. SES 18-50860 and a Kelly Fellowship at the University of Auckland. Rossi acknowledges research support from MIUR under the Rita Levi Montalcini scheme.

References

REFERENCES

Arraiz, I., Drukker, D. M., Kelejian, H. H. & Prucha, I. R. (2010) A spatial Cliff–Ord-type model with heteroskedastic innovations: Small and large sample results. Journal of Regional Science 50(2), 592614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badinger, H. & Egger, P. (2011) Estimation of higher-order spatial autoregressive cross-section models with heteroscedastic disturbances. Papers in Regional Science 90(1), 213235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bao, Y. (2013) Finite sample bias of the QMLE in spatial autoregressive models. Econometric Theory 29(1), 6888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bao, Y., Liu, X. & Yang, L. (2020) Indirect inference estimation of spatial autoregressions. Econometrics 8(3), 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bisin, A., Topa, G. & Verdier, T. (2004) Religious intermarriage and socialization in the United States. Journal of Political Economy 112(3), 615664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Case, A. C. (1991) Spatial patterns in household demand. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 59, 953965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durbin, J. (1988) Maximum likelihood estimation of the parameters of a system of simultaneous regression equations. Econometric Theory 4(1), 159170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilley, O. W. & Pace, R. (1996) On the Harrison and Rubinfeld data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31(3), 403405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaeser, E. L., Sacerdote, B. & Scheinkman, J. A. (1996) Crime and social interactions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 111(2), 507548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gouriéroux, C., Renault, E. & Touzi, N. (1995) Calibration by Simulation for Small Sample Bias Correction. Institut National De La Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.Google Scholar
Hansen, L. P., Heaton, J. & Yaron, A. (1996) Finite-sample properties of some alternative GMM estimators. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 14(3), 262280.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1978) Hedonic housing prices and the demand for clean air. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 5(1), 81102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, A. C. (1976) Estimating regression models with multiplicative heteroscedasticity. Econometrica 44(3), 461465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, F. & Lee, L. F. (2019) GEL estimation and tests of spatial autoregressive models. Journal of Econometrics 208(2), 585612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelejian, H. H. & Prucha, I. R. (1998) A generalized spatial two-stage least squares procedure for estimating a spatial autoregressive model with autoregressive disturbances. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics 17(1), 99121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelejian, H. H. & Prucha, I. R. (1999) A generalized moments estimator for the autoregressive parameter in a spatial model. International Economic Review 40(2), 509533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelejian, H. H. & Prucha, I. R. (2001) On the asymptotic distribution of the Moran I test statistic with applications. Journal of Econometrics 104(2), 219257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelejian, H.H. & Prucha, I.R. (2007) HAC estimation in a spatial framework. Journal of Econometrics 140(1), 131154. Analysis of spatially dependent data.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelejian, H. H. & Prucha, I. R. (2010) Specification and estimation of spatial autoregressive models with autoregressive and heteroskedastic disturbances. Journal of Econometrics 157(1), 5367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriacou, M., Phillips, P. & Rossi, F. (2017) Indirect inference in spatial autoregression. Econometrics Journal 20(2), 168189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, L. F. (2002) Consistency and efficiency of least squares estimation for mixed regressive, spatial autoregressive models. Econometric Theory 18(2), 252277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, L. F. (2003) Best spatial two-stage least squares estimators for a spatial autoregressive model with autoregressive disturbances. Econometric Reviews 22(4), 307335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, L. F. (2004) Asymptotic distributions of quasi-maximum likelihood estimators for spatial autoregressive models. Econometrica 72(6), 18991925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, L. F. (2007) GMM and 2SLS estimation of mixed regressive, spatial autoregressive models. Journal of Econometrics 137(2), 489514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeSage, J. P. (1999) The Theory and Practice of Spatial Econometrics, vol. 28. University of Toledo.Google Scholar
Lieberman, O. (1994) A Laplace approximation to the moments of a ratio of quadratic forms. Biometrika 81(4), 681690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, X. & Lee, L.F. (2010) GMM estimation of spatial autoregressive models with unknown heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics 157(1), 3452. Nonlinear and Nonparametric Methods in Econometrics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S. F. & Yang, Z. (2015) Modified QML estimation of spatial autoregressive models with unknown heteroskedasticity and nonnormality. Regional Science and Urban Economics 52, 5070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. M. (2008) Correlation testing in time series, spatial and cross-sectional data. Journal of Econometrics 147(1), 516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simlai, P. (2014) Estimation of variance of housing prices using spatial conditional heteroskedasticity (SARCH) model with an application to Boston housing price data. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 54(1), 1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Kyriacou et al. supplementary material

Kyriacou et al. supplementary material

Download Kyriacou et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 3 MB
You have Access Open access

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED INDIRECT INFERENCE IN HETEROSKEDASTIC SPATIAL MODELS
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED INDIRECT INFERENCE IN HETEROSKEDASTIC SPATIAL MODELS
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED INDIRECT INFERENCE IN HETEROSKEDASTIC SPATIAL MODELS
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *