12.01.2015 Views

Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data - Free

Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data - Free

Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data - Free

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

226<br />

Chapter 9<br />

where each z j is uncorrelated with u 1 <strong>and</strong> u 2 (z 1 can be unity to allow for an intercept).<br />

Without further information, equation (9.31) is unidentified, <strong>and</strong> equation<br />

(9.32) is just identified if <strong>and</strong> only if d 13 0 0. We maintain these assumptions in what<br />

follows.<br />

Now suppose that d 12 ¼ d 22 . Because d 22 is identified in equation (9.32) we can<br />

treat it as known for studying identification <strong>of</strong> equation (9.31). But d 12 ¼ d 22 , <strong>and</strong> so<br />

we can write<br />

y 1 d 12 z 2 ¼ g 12 y 2 þ d 11 z 1 þ d 13 z 3 þ u 1 ð9:33Þ<br />

where y 1 d 12 z 2 is e¤ectively known. Now the right-h<strong>and</strong> side <strong>of</strong> equation (9.33) has<br />

one endogenous variable, y 2 , <strong>and</strong> the two exogenous variables z 1 <strong>and</strong> z 3 . Because z 2<br />

is excluded from the right-h<strong>and</strong> side, we can use z 2 as an instrument for y 2 ,aslongas<br />

z 2 appears in the reduced form for y 2 . This is the case provided d 12 ¼ d 22 0 0.<br />

This approach to showing that equation (9.31) is identified also suggests a consistent<br />

estimation procedure: first, estimate equation (9.32) by 2SLS using ðz 1 ; z 2 ; z 3 Þ as<br />

instruments, <strong>and</strong> let ^d 22 be the estimator <strong>of</strong> d 22 . Then, estimate<br />

y 1<br />

y 2<br />

^d 22 z 2 ¼ g 12 y 2 þ d 11 z 1 þ d 13 z 3 þ error<br />

by 2SLS using ðz 1 ; z 2 ; z 3 Þ as instruments. Since ^d 22 ! p<br />

d 12 when d 12 ¼ d 22 0 0, this last<br />

step produces consistent estimators <strong>of</strong> g 12 , d 11 , <strong>and</strong> d 13 . Unfortunately, the usual 2SLS<br />

st<strong>and</strong>ard errors obtained from the final estimation would not be valid because <strong>of</strong> the<br />

preliminary estimation <strong>of</strong> d 22 .<br />

It is easier to use a system procedure when cross equation restrictions are present<br />

because the asymptotic variance can be obtained directly. We can always rewrite the<br />

system in a linear form with the restrictions imposed. For this example, one way to<br />

do so is to write the system as<br />

<br />

y 1<br />

¼ y <br />

2 z 1 z 2 z 3 0 0<br />

b þ u <br />

1<br />

ð9:34Þ<br />

0 0 z 2 0 y 1 z 1 u 2<br />

where b ¼ðg 12 ; d 11 ; d 12 ; d 13 ; g 21 ; d 21 Þ 0 . The parameter d 22 does not show up in b because<br />

we have imposed the restriction d 12 ¼ d 22 by appropriate choice <strong>of</strong> the matrix<br />

<strong>of</strong> explanatory variables.<br />

The matrix <strong>of</strong> instruments is I 2 n z, meaning that we just use all exogenous variables<br />

as instruments in each equation. Since I 2 n z has six columns, the order condition<br />

is exactly satisfied (there are six elements <strong>of</strong> b), <strong>and</strong> we have already seen when<br />

the rank condition holds. The system can be consistently estimated using GMM or<br />

3SLS.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!