Truth and Robustness in Cross-country Growth Regressions
We re-examine studies of cross-country growth regressions by Levine and Renelt ("American Economic Review", Vol. 82, 1992, pp. 942-963) and Sala-i-Martin ("American Economic Review", Vol. 87, 1997a, pp. 178-183; Economics Department, Columbia, University, 1997b). In a realistic Monte Carlo experiment, their variants of Edward Leamer's extreme-bounds analysis are compared with a cross-sectional version of the general-to-specific search methodology associated with the LSE approach to econometrics. Levine and Renelt's method has low size and low power, while Sala-i-Martin's method has high size and high power. The general-to-specific methodology is shown to have a near nominal size and high power. Sala-i-Martin's method and the general-to-specific method are then applied to the actual data from Sala-i-Martin's original study. Copyright 2004 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Year of publication: |
2004
|
---|---|
Authors: | Hoover, Kevin D. ; Perez, Stephen J. |
Published in: |
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. - Department of Economics, ISSN 0305-9049. - Vol. 66.2004, 5, p. 765-798
|
Publisher: |
Department of Economics |
Saved in:
Saved in favorites
Similar items by person
-
Truth and robustness in cross-country growth regressions
Hoover, Kevin D., (2000)
-
A bootstrap method for identifying and evaluating a structural vector autoregression
Hoover, Kevin D., (2006)
-
Empirical Identification of the Vector Autoregression: The Causes and Effects of U.S. M2
Hoover, Kevin D., (2008)
- More ...