Multiple Trend Breaks And The Unit-Root Hypothesis

Robin L. Lumsdaine and David Papell

The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1997, vol. 79, issue 2, 212-218

Abstract: Ever since Nelson and Plosser (1982) found evidence in favor of the unit-root hypothesis for 13 long-term annual macro series, observed unit - root behavior has been equated with persistence in the economy. Perron (1989) questioned this interpretation, arguing instead that the "observed" behavior may indicate failure to account for structural change. Zivot and Andrews (1992) restored confidence in the unit-root hypothesis by incorporating an endogenous break point into the specification. By allowing for the possibility of two endogenous break points, we find more evidence against the unit-root hypothesis than Zivot and Andrews, but less than Perron. © 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (809)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/003465397556791 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Software Item: LPUNIT: RATS procedure to implement Lumsdaine-Papell unit root test with structural breaks
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tpr:restat:v:79:y:1997:i:2:p:212-218

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://mitpressjour ... rnal/?issn=0034-6535

Access Statistics for this article

The Review of Economics and Statistics is currently edited by Pierre Azoulay, Olivier Coibion, Will Dobbie, Raymond Fisman, Benjamin R. Handel, Brian A. Jacob, Kareen Rozen, Xiaoxia Shi, Tavneet Suri and Yi Xu

More articles in The Review of Economics and Statistics from MIT Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by The MIT Press ().