Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different?

James Morley, Charles Nelson and Eric Zivot

Working Papers from University of Washington, Department of Economics

Date: 2000-04
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/cnelson/MNZ00_04_25.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not Found (http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/cnelson/MNZ00_04_25.pdf [301 Moved Permanently]--> https://www.econ.washington.edu/user/cnelson/MNZ00_04_25.pdf [302 Found]--> https://econ.washington.edu/user/cnelson/MNZ00_04_25.pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Why Are the Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Components Decompositions of GDP So Different? (2003)
Working Paper: Why are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-component decompositions of GDP so Different? (2003)
Working Paper: Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different? (2002)
Working Paper: Why are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP so Different? (2000)
Working Paper: Why Are Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Component Decompositions of GDP So Different? (2000)
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:udb:wpaper:0013

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from University of Washington, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael Goldblatt ().