Statistical Adequacy and the Testing of Trend Versus Difference Stationarity
Elena Andreou and
Aris Spanos ()
Econometric Reviews, 2003, vol. 22, issue 3, 217-237
The debate on whether macroeconomic series are trend or difference stationary, initiated by Nelson and Plosser [Nelson, C. R.; Plosser, C. I. (1982). Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: some evidence and implications. Journal of Monetary Economics 10:139-162] remains unresolved. The main objective of the paper is to contribute toward a resolution of this issue by bringing into the discussion the problem of statistical adequacy . The paper revisits the empirical results of Nelson and Plosser [Nelson, C. R.; Plosser, C. I. (1982). Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: some evidence and implications. Journal of Monetary Economics 10:139-162] and Perron [Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica 57:1361-1401] and shows that several of their estimated models are misspecified. Respecification with a view to ensuring statistical adequacy gives rise to heteroskedastic AR( k ) models for some of the price series. Based on estimated models which are statistically adequate, the main conclusion of the paper is that the majority of the data series are trend stationary.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (21) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:emetrv:v:22:y:2003:i:3:p:217-237
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
Econometric Reviews is currently edited by Dr. Essie Maasoumi
More articles in Econometric Reviews from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().